(1.) I have heard Mrs. A. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. Notice has appeared on behalf of the complainant-opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. I have also heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned counsel, who has appeared as amicus curiae. The material facts, leading to this revision, may, in brief, be set out as under:
(2.) The moot question, which has arisen for determination in the present revision, is:
(3.) For the purpose of sustaining this revision, Mrs. Bhattacharya, learned counsel, has contended, referring to Rule 66 of the Plantation Labour Rules, that the conviction of the petitioner, under Section 630 of the Companies Act, is not sustainable in law inasmuch as the case of the present petitioner was squarely covered by Clause (iii) of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 66 of the Plantation Labour Rules.