GANESH COLD STORAGE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 18.12.76 by which he took cognizance of offences under section 14 of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company at Shosarai in the district of Nalanda. Petitioners 2 to 6 are directors and persons-in-charge of the establishment and are responsible for the conduct of its business.

(2.) It appears that on 18.12.76 the Inspector, Provident Fund, Bihar, filed a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate in regard to infraction alleged to have been committed by the petitioners in terms of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (hereinafter called the Provident Fund Act). It is alleged that the petitioners were required to pay to the family pension fund of the members as well as the employers share of contribution within 15 days of the close of the month. It was also alleged that the petitioners failed to submit to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar, Patna the monthly return of every month despite several requests. The accused failed to rectify the infraction committed by the petitioners even when directed to do so. The period for which the petitioners failed to submit the returns and to contribute to the fund was January. 1969. In paragraph 8 of the complaint it was alleged that the petitioners had committed offences under the Provident Fund Scheme read with section 14 of the Provident Fund Act on or about 15.2.69, 25.2.69 and 15.2.69. The complaint having been filed, cognizance of the offence was taken and the petitioners were summoned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence as the complaint had been filed beyond the period of limitation. Reliance was placed on section 468 (1) and 2 (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 468 prohibits a court from taking cognizance of any offence of the category specified in sub-section (2) after the expiry of the period of limitation. Subsection 2 (b) lays down one year from the date of commission of offence, if the offance is punishable with imprisonment for term not exceeding one year. Section 14 (1) (a) of the Provident Fund Act, provides that any employer who contravenes or defaults in complying with the provision of section 17, in so far it relates to payment of inspection charges of paragraph 38 of the scheme, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to six months. Therefore, there can be no doubt that the offences under the Provident Funds Act are referrable to section 468 (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was, therefore, contended that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to take cognizance in 1976 when the infraction was in 1969.