SOHANLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision by Sohanlal against his conviction under Section 21 (1) read with Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (Act 43 of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act) by the City Magistrate, Jodhpur. He has been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500, in default to simple imprisonment for three months. His appeal to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, failed. He has now come in revision to this Court.

(2.) THE prosecution case against the petitioner was that on 26 December 1958, the factory known as R. J. Engineering Company and Iron Re-Rolling Mills, Jodhpur, was inspected by B. Kumar, Inspector of Factories and amongst other defects he found that

(3.) IN this revision learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that as the petitioner was not given opportunity to produce his defence witnesses, he was not examined after the close of the prosecution evidence and the trial has been vitiated. It was further contended that the petitioner cannot be said to have contravened the provisions of Section 21 (1) of the Act as it has not been proved that the parts of the machinery were in motion or use at the time they were inspected by B. Kumar. According to the learned Counsel, Section 21 (1) requires that the parts of the machinery should be securely fenced only when they are in motion or in use. If they are not in motion or use no obligation is cast on the manager or occupier to fence them. It was also urged that the petitioner was neither an occupier nor a manager of the factory and could not be punished for contravention of Section 21 (1) even if there be any.