JUDGMENT - S.S. PARKAR, J.:---By this application the applicants have challenged the order dated 10-5-1994 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First class, Pulgaon, framing the charges under sections 25 and 26 read with section 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, (for short "the Act"), confirmed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, in Criminal Revision Application No. 75/94 by the judgment and the order dated 7-9-1995.

2. Applicant No. 1 is a unit of the Maharashtra State Textile Corporation, Bombay (for short "the Corporation"), which is a Government of Maharashtra undertaking. Applicant No. 2 is the Chairman of the said Corporation. Applicant No. 3 is the General Manager and applicant No. 4 is the Factory Manager of applicant No. 1 Pulgaon Cotton Mills (for short the "Mill").

3. A private complaint was filed by respondent No. 1 Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, (for short "the Board"), in the Court of the JMFC, Pulgaon, being Criminal Case No. 992/90 against the applicants, alleging that the applicants failed to provide adequate arrangements for treatment of industrial effluents to satisfy the standards prescribed by the Board. The staff of the complainant collected samples from time to time to check the quality of effluent discharged by applicant No. 1. From the report of the analysis it was noticed that the applicants failed to achieve the standard prescribed by the Board and, therefore, show cause notice was issued to the applicant which was followed by the complaint filed in the Court. The applicants had filed the application for quashing the proceedings on the ground that the complaint was not maintainable for want of requisite sanction under section 197, Cri.P.C. The said application was allowed by the Magistrate but the said order was reversed in Criminal Revision No. 45/89 filed before the Sessions Court by the complainant Board. Thereafter, the evidence on behalf of the complainant was led in the Court of the JMFC. The learned JMFC, after considering the complaint and the evidence of the complainant framed the charges under sections 25 and 26 read with section 44 of the Act. The order framing the charge was challenged by the applicants unsucessfully before the Sessions Court in Criminal Revision No. 75/94. The said orders are challenged in the present application filed under section 482, Cri.P.C.

4. Shri Deshpande, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants raised three contentions before me. Firstly, he contended that the applicants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the public servants and, therefore, the provisions of sanction under section 197, Cri.P.C. are attracted and in the absence of requisite sanction the prosecution against them is not maintainable. In order to show that the applicants are public servants he relied on two factors; one is that the applicant Mill's parent company that is, the Corporation is wholly run by the Government of Maharashtra and secondly, the Memorandum of Articles of Association of Pulgaon Cotton Mills Ltd.; and the Maharashtra Textile Corporation Ltd. Clause 71(1) of the memorandum and articles of association of applicant No. 1 states that the Governor shall have right to appoint Directors on the Board of Directors of the said company. Clause (iv) of the said Article states that the Governor shall have power to remove any Director including the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the company at any time in his absolute discretion. Similarly, sub-clauses (iv) and (vi) of Article 72 of the Articles of Association of the Corporation is relied on whereby it is the Governor who has power to appoint and remove the Directors including the Chairman and Vice Chairman. Although, this point was raised in the earlier application made by the applicants before the trial Court, after issue of process and though allowed by the learned Magistrate, was turned down by the Sessions Court in the criminal revision. Though the said order was not challenged before this Court ea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document