Subsequent deposit of employees' provident fund dues does not automatically lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 406/409 of the Indian Penal Code, and the liability of directors in such cases should be determined at a subsequent stage.

Sankar Acharyya, J.

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by petitioner against The State of West Bengal and Abhijit Ghosh as Enforcement Officer, Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation, Sub-Regional Office, Howrah as opposite party nos. 1 and 2 respectively for quashing the charge sheet in Special Case No. 1 of 2014 arising out of Golabari Police Station Case No. 492 dated 01.08.2012 under Sections 406/409 of the Indian Penal Code pending before learned Judge, Special Court cum District and Sessions Judge, Howrah.

2. Undisputedly, the petitioner is the Director of Aryan Heemghar (P) Ltd. and said company made default in depositing Rs.2,25,225/- with the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation although said amount was deducted from salary of the employees of the company for the period of January, 2011 to March, 2012. Alleging said fact the opposite party no. 2 lodged FIR at Golabari Police Station on 01.08.2012. Within a week thereafter said amount was deposited by the company and acknowledged by Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation. Petitioner has alleged that he was not aware about the fact as he would not look after the matter of disbursing salary and deposit of Employees’ Provident Fund (in short E.P.F.) and as soon as he came to learn the fact he arranged for deposit of the due E.P.F. within one week of lodging FIR.

3. Determining questions are whether the petitioner is liable to be prosecuted and whether the proceeding in the Court of learned Special Judge is liable to be quashed.

4. Mr. Debajyoti Deb, learned Advocate for the petitioner has advanced his arguments that the petitioner, being Director cannot be held responsible for the alleged offence and since deposit of the outstanding dues of E.P.F. has been made within a short period the proceeding is liable to be quashed. He has relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Adoni Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner reported in (1995) Supp. 4 SCC 580 and the judgments of Calcutta High Court in the cases of Howrah Motor Company Limited v. Samir Kumar Das reported in CDJ 2004 Cal HC 438, Air Transport Corporation v. State of West Bengal reported in CDJ 2006 Cal HC 289 and Jasoda Glass and Silicate & Ors. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors. reported in 2002 (2) CHN 407.

5. On the other hand, Mrs. Aparna Banerjee, learned Advocate for the State argued that there is no such law, nor any decision which conclusively dictates that in case of subsequent payment of the amount of employees’ share of contribution towards P.F., however, belated it might be, the criminal prosecution must be quashed as held by Hon’ble Justice Sailendra Prasad Talukdar in a decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Kamala Tea Company Limited & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal & Anr. and four other cases reported in 2007 (2) CLJ (Cal) 124. Relying upon the same judgment Mrs. Banerjee submitted that the liability of petitioner as Director of the Company, can be best decided at a subsequent stage. She has also relied upon a decision of Hon’ble Justice Partha Sakha Datta in the case of The Eastern Tea Company Limited v. Provident Fund Authority in six cases including C.R.R. No. 2918 of 2007 of Calcutta High Court and has argued that all the decisions cited on behalf of petitioner were discussed by Hon’ble Justice Datta in that case and dismissed the revisional applications which decision has refused claim of petitioners similar to the claim of present petitioner. Mrs. Banerjee has also relied upon another decision of Hon’ble Justice Partha Sakha Datta of this High Court in the case of Hotel Dock Palace Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. reported in 2007 (1) CHN 930. She has also cited the case of Howrah Mills Co. Ltd. & Ors. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors. of this High Court in Case No. W.P. 3382 of 1993.

6. I have gone through the judgments cited befor