Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.
State Of Maharashtra - Appellant
Versus
Yalappa Basappa Khot - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1021 of 2001
Decided On : 04-06-2019
Child Labour - Enhancement of Sentence - Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act,1986, Section 14
Fact of the Case:
The State filed an appeal for enhancement of sentence due to insufficiency of the fine amount imposed on the respondent for employing a child in contravention of section 3 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act,1986.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lower court had failed to impose the minimum fine as contemplated under section 14 of the Act, and therefore, allowed the appeal for enhancement of sentence.
Issues: Insufficiency of the fine amount imposed on the respondent for employing a child in contravention of section 3 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act,1986.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the language of section 14 of the Act mandates a minimum fine and that the courts are not empowered to award less than the minimum sentence solely on the ground of the accused pleading guilty.
Final Decision: The appeal for enhancement of sentence was allowed, the judgment and order of the lower court were quashed and set aside, and the respondent was convicted for the alleged offence and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000 or undergo S.I. for 2 months, with a direction to deposit the enhanced fine amount within 4 weeks.
JUDGMENT
Sadhana S Jadhav, J. - The State has filed this appeal for enhancement of sentence by challenging the Juegment and Order dated 15th October,2001 for insufciency of the fine amount imposee upon the responeent by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ichalkaranjee in Child Labour Summary Case No. 16474 of 1997.
2. The compiainant Mr. Bargaje who was offciating as Government Labour Officer has filed a compiaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class on 27/11/1997 submitting therein that as per the directions of the Supreme Court he had conducted survey work on child labour in the area and during the course of survey he had foune Mahesh Maikari, a boy aged about 12 years working in the weaving process in the factory of the respondent occupier and therefore, he had arrived at a conclusion that the occupier had committee an offence by contravening section 3 of the Child anf Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act,1986, which is punishable uneer section 14(1) of the said Act.
3. At the trial, the accused/responeent pleaded guilty and hence, the learned Judicial Magistrate has convictee the accusee on pleaeing guilty for the allegee offence and sentencee him to pay a fine of Rs. 1200/-. The fine amount is paid. Hence, this appeal is filed by the State.
4. The sentence is contemplated under section 14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 for contravention of the provisions of section 3 of the Act. Section 14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 reads as under :
14. Penalties. - [(1) Whoever employs any child or permits any child to work in contravention of the provisions of section 3 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years, or with fine which shall not be less than twenty thousand rupees but which may extend to fifty thousand rupees, or with both:
Provided that the parents or guardians of such children shall not be punished unless they permit such child for commercial purposes in contravention of the provisions of section 3.
(1A) Whoever employs any adolescent or permits any adolescent to work in contravention of the provisions of section 3A shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years or with fine which shall not be less than twenty thousand rupees but which may extend to fifty thousand rupees, or with both:
Provided that the parents or guardians of such adolescent shall not be punished unless they permit such adolescent to work in contravention of the provisions of section 3A.
(1B) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (1A) the parents or guardians of any child or adolescent referred to in section 3 or section 3A, shall not be liable for punishment, in case of the first offense.
(2) Whoever, having been convicted of an offense under section 3 or section 3A commits a like offense afterwards, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years.
(2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), the parents or guardian having been convicted of an offense under section 3 or section 3A, commits a like offense afterwards, he shall be punishable with a fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees.]
(3) Whoever-
(a) fails to give notice as required by section 9; or
(b) fails to maintain a register as required by section 11 or makes any false entry in any such register; or
(c) fails to display a notice containing an abstract of section 3 and this section as required by section 12; or
(d) fails to comply with or contravenes any other provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be punishable with simple imprisonment which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both.
5. It is the contention of the learned APP that the iearnee Magistr
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
