JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA Vs. INSPECTOR, FACTORIES AND BOILERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated March 6,1990, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Hanumangarh Junction, by which the learned Magistrate framed the charges against the petitioner Under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 92 of the Factories Act.

(2.) MR . S.K. Goswami, Inspector, Factories and Boilers, Hanumangarh Junction, filed a complaint against the petitioner Under Section 92 of the Factories Act. It was alleged in the complaint that the complainant visited the Factory of the petitioner on January 7/8,1986, in connection with the accident which took -place on December 20,1985, in which a female childlabour was died and as the accused had not used the substantial protection -guard, he has, thus, contravened the provisions of Section 21 of the Factories Act, which is punishable Under Section 92 of the Factories Act. It was, also, mentioned that as the substantial protection guard was not installed, therefore, the grinding -stone broke and it came -out from the iron shut enclosure and hit the child labour on her right occipital region, the statements of Babu Ram, Ranjeet Singh, Rambux, Jagdish Chandra Sharma; site plan, site inspection memo, notice and some other documents were, also, filed. The learned Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner and issued process. Thereafter, by his order dated March 6, 1990. The learned Magistrate framed the charges against the petitioner under Section 304A, I.P.C. and Section 92 of the Indian Factories Act. It is against this order that the present petition Under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed.

(3.) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioner that there is no evidence on record, on the basis of which the charges Under Section 92 of the Factories Act and/or Under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code are made out. He, therefore, prayed that the charges, framed against the petitioner, may be quashed. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has supported the order passed by the learned lower Court, framing the charges against the petitioner.