PRABHULAL POTADIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was convicted under Section 92 of the Indian Factories Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ - in default to undergo R.I. for one month, by a Magistrate, 1st Class, Cuttack. On appeal the conviction and sentence was maintained by the Sessions Judge. Hence this revision.

(2.) ON 28 -1 -62, the Inspector of Factories, Orissa, inspected a brick kiln of the accused petitioner, standing on the Cuttack, Bhubaneswar road He found a number of persons working there all engaged in the process of manufacturing bricks. The Inspector of Factories found the kiln to be a "factory" within the meaning of the Indian Factories Act, 1948, but the same was being run without registration and without the written approval of the Chief Inspector of Factories. He therefore submitted a prosecution report (Ext. 1) against the petitioner and after cognisance was taken under Section 92 of the Indian Factories Act, the accused was summoned to stand a trial.

(3.) IN support of the prosecution case two witnesses were examined. P.W. 1 is the Inspector of Factories, and P.W 2 is the Chief Inspector of Factories, Orissa. It is the evidence of P.W. 1 that he inspected the kiln on 28 -1 -62 at about 8 a.m. accompanied by P.W. 2. They found a number of persons working in 2 kilns which were actually in operation and the smoke was coming out of six chimneys provided in the kilns. They also found a 5 Horse Power Diesel Engine working for supplying water to the manufacturing process. About 50 workers, both men, women and children were found working in the field. He ascertained that the usual number of workers employed was about 300. During the time of their inspection, they found six workers were charging coal into the kiln, three were unloading sand from truck, three were carrying sand to the moulding section and several other workers were found engaged in other miscellaneous work. They also found some trucks were engaged in carrying materials to the kiln. Thereafter they submitted a prosecution report against the petitioner for the reasons already stated.