RADHE SHYAM MAKHARIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri D. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing for the State Complaint petition filed officially by the Labour Inspector-cum-Labour Enforcement Officer ultimately resulted in the summoning order dated 8.6.1999 in Official Complaint No. 52(C) 2 of 1999 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif by which he directed the summons to be issued against the Petitioners for standing their trial for committing offences under Sections 19(4) of the Minimum Wages Act read with offences punishable under Sections 175, 176, 353 and 374 of the IPC.

(2.) The gist of the allegations is that the complainant went at the business establishment, i.e., the petrol pump of the Petitioners and required them to produce certain registers/documents required to be maintained under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act but as per the allegation the Petitioners not only refused producing the documents/registers but also drove away the employees who were working there so that they could not be questioned on the point of payment by the Petitioner of wages to them. The complainant inferred that it was intentionally done so as to avoiding the enforcement of the provisions of the Act and as such, it constituted offences under Section 175, 176, 353 and 374 of the Penal Code. The inference was also that the employees were forced to do labour after being either not paid the appropriate wages or after being paid the wages which could not be as per the fixed norms in that behalf.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court to the fact by submitting that there is no allegation that the Inspector-cum-Labour Enforcement Officer was obstructed in any manner in discharging his official duties and there was none coming to him even after the day of inspection, to complain that he was being forced to do labour without being paid appropriate wages. It was contended as such that the offences under Sections 353 and 374 of the Penal Code may not be constituted on the facts of the case. The learned Senior Counsel also submitted that the facts stated and alleged may also not constitute the offences under Sections 175 and 176 of the IPC.