S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. The three primarily significant issues, which have come to the fore in this reference to the Full Bench, may well be formulated in the terms following :-

(i) Whether the failure of the employer to deposit the contributions in contravention of Paragraphs 38 and 76 of the Employees Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, read with Sec.14 of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, would be a continuing offence?

(ii) Whether the disputed issues of limitation under Sections 468 to 473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can appropriately be raised directly in the High Court for the quashing of proceedings under Sec. 482 of the said Code?

(iii) Whether a petition of complaint for offences punishable under Sec.14 of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, must in terms plead each and every relevant fact and, in particular, the precise number of employees of the prosecuted establishment?

(iv) Whether in the event of its failure to do so, the proceedings would be vitiated on that score alone?

2. Equally at issue is the correctness of the view of the learned single Judge in M/s. United Sports Works V/s. State of B