BAKRIDAN BIBI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE seven cases have been filed by the same petitioners aeainst the same opposite party under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure for auashins the cognizance taken against the petitioners under Section 28 (a) and Section 29 of the Payment of Bonus Act. 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") The petitioners are partners of M/s. Dhanbad Transport Company. Different cases had to be filed because they related to the different accounting years. Since a common Question of law has arisen in all these seven cases they were made analogous and were put UP for hearing together. This ctmmon iudgment will govern all the seven cases.

(2.) THE cases against the petitioners were initiated on the basis of complaints filed by the State of Bihar-Opposite party through Suresh Prasad Singh, Inspector under the Act, Copies of the complaint petitions have been filed as Annexure '2' to the applications.

(3.) IN my opinion, the submission of the learned Counsel of the petitioners is well founded. The impugned order in the various cases cannot bp sustained. IN the result, all the seven applications are allowed and the orders passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance against the petitioners and conseauent order or orders passed on the said cognizance are quashed.