A S POPLAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') is directed against the prosecution of the petitioner in Complaint Case No. 339C/2 of 1982 under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (in short 'the Act') pending in the court of Shri M. A. Baki, Judicial Magistrate 1st class Hunger, in which the learned Magistrate has, on 28 -6 -1983, ordered for issuing of summons against the petitioner.

(2.) It appears that on 3 -8 -1982 opposite party No. 2 who happened to be the Inspector of Factories, Monghyr Circle, Monghyr filed a complaint petition in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Monghyr making allegations under Section 92 of the Factories Act against the persons named in the complaint petition. It was alleged that an accident has taken place in the Cigarette Factory of I. T. C. at Monghyr on 25 -4 -1982 in which a machine operator, namely, Ashok Kumar Sharma got three fingers of his right hand injured. On enquiry it found that in the machine No. 585 there was no protective cover or safeguard on the deflector resulting in this accident. Accordingly the complaint petition under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 for violation of Sections 88, 21(1) (iv) and Rules 55 -A and 96 of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 (in short 'the Rules') was filed. In this complaint petition allegations were made against five persons who were shown in the column of accused. However, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate treated this complaint petition only against four persons and not against the fifth person (who happens to the present petitioner). After taking cognizance of the case against those four persons (not the present petitioner) he passed an order for issuing of summons to them and transferred the case to the court of Shri M. A. Baki, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Monghyr.

(3.) The four persons against whom the cognizance was taken moved this Court for quashing their prosecution and by an order dated 22 -3 -1983 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 6568 of 1982 the proceeding against them was quashed.. The petitioner, who was named as one of the accused in the complaint petition, did not join those four persons in the said Criminal Miscellaneous Case inasmuch as by the said order the Chief Judicial Magistrate had not taken cognizance against him. When the record of the case was received by the learned Judicial Magistrate, he, by his order dated 28 -6 -1983 discharged the aforesaid four persons in terms of the order passed by this Court in the above mentioned Criminal Miscellaneous case. He, however, ordered for issuance of uummons against this petitioner.