VIJAY PRAKASH SAHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that one Jageshwar Prajapati in course of his employment in the factory known as M'/s. Akshay Technology to which the petitioner is the Managing Director, met with an accident, whereby an iron mould fell on the body of Jageshwar Prajapati as a result of which, he died and for that occurrence, an FIR was lodged, which was registered as Ramgarh P.S. Case No, 187 of 1998 under Section 287 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned counsel further submits that for the same occurrence Factory Inspector also lodged a complaint bearing C. Case No. 173 of 1998 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh upon which cognizance of the offence was taken under Section 92 of the Factories Act and subsequently when the petitioner was put on trial, he was found guilty for the offence and, therefore, the order of conviction was recorded against the petitioner. Being aggrieved with that order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh vide Cr. A. No. 160 of 2000, which was ultimately heard by 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh who set aside the order of conviction and acquitted the petitioner from the charges. Thereafter, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh on the basis of the charge-sheet, submitted in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 187 of 1998, took cognizance of the offence under Sections 287 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner on 19.5.2004 and, therefore, the petitioner has come before this Court by invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the order taking cognizance as well as the entire criminal proceedings on the ground that the instant prosecution is not maintainable under the general law, as for the same offence, a case had been lodged under the special law i.e. under the Factories Act in which the petitioner has been acquitted.