AMIT MITTAL AND ANOTHER Vs. PUNJAB GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") is for quashing of Criminal Complaint No. COMA-20/2019 dated 27.02.2019 (Annexure P/1) titled Punjab Government through Labour Inspector Grade-I, SAS Nagar Vs. Sukanto Aich and another and the impugned order, dated 06.03.2019 (Annexure P/2) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, SAS Nagar, summoning the present petitioners for violation of Sections 25-O and 25-R of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, "the Act") and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the complaint, Annexure P/1 and the summoning order, Annexure P/2 are misuse of the process of law and the same be quashed while invoking the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code. The relief claimed for in this petition can only be granted by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code because the documents which the petitioners want to produce in defence cannot be looked into in revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. by the Court of Sessions.

(3.) On the ground of maintainability of the present petition seeking quashing of the complainant, Annexure P/1 and the summoning order, Annexure P/2, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgments of Supreme Court in Prabhu Chawla Vs. State of Rajasthan and another, 2016 4 RCR(Cri) 270 wherein scope and ambit of Section 482 vis-a-vis Section 397 of the Code was discussed and Hon'ble Apex Court observed that powers under Section 482 of the Code begin with a non-obstante clause and there can be no total ban on the exercise of such course and jurisdiction. While arguing on the point of maintainability of petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the petitioners contended that even if alternative remedy by way of revision, as per Section 397 Cr.P.C. is available to the petitioners, such petition for quashing of summoning order cannot be dismissed only on the premise that alternative remedy was available to the accused persons. On this point, reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dhariwal Tabaco Products Ltd. and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2011 AIR(SC)(Cri) 1846