ANUP KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing order dated 3.12.1999 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in F.A. Case No. 657 of 1999, whereby he took cognizance under Section 92 of Factories Act against petitioner. It appears that Factory Inspector, Dhanbad made inspection of M/s. B.C.C.L. Press, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad and thereafter filed complaint alleging therein that stability certificate in respect of building of Factory in form 34 has not been sent by occupier or manager of Factory to Chief Factory Inspector which is violative of provisions of Rule 3-A of Bihar Factories Rules, 1950.

(2.) It appears that said complaint received in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on 3.12.1999 and on the same day he took cognizance of the offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act.

(3.) It is submitted by Sri A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner being a director of the company cannot be prosecuted under Section 92 of the Factories Act because he is not occupier within the meaning of Section 2(n) of the Factories Act. It is submitted that the person who manages the affairs of factory is occupier, therefore he can only be prosecuted under Section 92 of the Factories Act. It is submitted that petitioner had not been appointed by Central Government as occupier of the factory, therefore order taking cognizance is bad. It is further submitted that order taking cognizance is also violative of Section 106 of the Factories Act.