MAHESH AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', in short) has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order recorded by the Sessions Judge Vaishah at Hazipur dated July 18, 2002 in Criminal Revision No. 264 of 2001 as well the order taking cognizance of offence dated August 8, 2001 recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishah at Hazipur in Case No. C2-588 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of offence under Sections 12(1) and 18 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 ("1948 Act", in short). The complaint at Annexure-1 was filed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Muzaffarpur against the petitioners basing the allegations on the inspection made in the premises of petitioner No. 3. J.J. Industries at Hajipur also claiming that the labourers were being paid remuneration less than the minimum wages fixed by the Government as well for violation of various related Rules.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Penal Sections have been wrongly quoted whether or not the Penal Sections have or have not been correctly mentioned, but if the allegations mentioned therein constitute any offence punishable under the 1948 Act, then on the ground as submitted the complaint would not be dismissed.

(3.) The other argument was that the inspection was made on January 20, 2001, but cognizance of offence was taken on August 8, 2001, beyond a period of six months. As submitted, Section 22- B(2) of the 1948 Act bars cognizance of an offence under clause (a) or clause (b) of Section 22 of the Act, unless complaint thereof was made within one month of the grant of sanction under this Section or, in the case of an offence under Section 22-A, unless complaint thereof was made within six months of the date on which the offence was alleged to have been committed.