CORNELIUS MURMU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.J. Sanga, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Lily Sahay, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dtd. 17/9/2014 in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 246 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3645 of 2014, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. F.I.R. was lodged by the Enforcement Officer alleging therein that M/s Seventh Day Adventist Hospital, Bariatu Road, Ranchi (hereinafter referred to as the establishment) is covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. It is further alleged that the establishment is required by virtue of provision of Sec. 6 of the Act read with para 38 of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 to pay the Employees share of Provident Fund contribution deducted from the salaries/wages of the employees on or before 15 th of the following months. It is further alleged that during inspection of the said establishment on 23/5/2014 it has been noticed that the employer viz Shri Conrnelius Murmu, Executive Vice President/Administrator has deducted as per details enclosed, a sum of Rs.21,28,701.00 from the salary/wages of the employees as employees share of Provident Fund contribution for the period from 09/2011 to 04/2014 and have not yet deposited the amount with the statutory fund, in violation of Sec. 6 of the Act read with para 38 of the Employees Provident Scheme. Non remitting of the Provident fund money after deducting the Employees share from their salary/wages tantamount to an offence of criminal breach of trust as defined under Sec. 405 of I.P.C.

(3.) Mr. J. J. Sanga, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that EPFO called upon the petitioner to negotiate and informed about the amount deducted. He further submits that when the talks were going on in the meantime, this F.I.R. has been lodged. He further submits that the entire amount of Rs.21,28,750.00 has already been deposited and document has been brought on record by way of Annexure-8 series of the petition. He further submits that there is already provision under Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and when the special Act is there, Penal Sec. is not attracted. According to him proceeding under Sec. 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952, has already been initiated against the petitioner by the concerned Department.