MEERA ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which the petitioner has prayed for writ in the nature of the Habeas Corpus.

(2.) IT is the grievance of the petitioner namely, Smt. Meera Roy that her husband has been taken into custody by the Provident Fund Authority, although such Provident Fund Authority is not legally authorised to take any person into custody.

(3.) THE learned Advocate appearing for the Provident Fund Authority submits that the husband of the petitioner being an employer was detained in custody for non-payment of provident fund dues amounting to Rs. 2,47,031/- (Rupees Two lakhs forty seven thousand thirty one only) for the period from september 2003 to August 2005. The learned Advocate of the Provident Fund authority also refers to Section 8b (b) of the Employees Provident Funds and miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and submits that in view of that provisions of the Act, the Provident Fund Authority is empowered to arrest a person and detain in prison. The provisions of Section 8b (b) reads as follows:-