ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. N. Naha Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the CrPC with the following prayer:-

“1. It is, respectfully prayed by the petitioners that the proceedings of Criminal Case No.74/MW Act/2015 pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and Labour Court, Durg (CG) may kindly be quashed.

2. Any other relief/relief’s which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted to the petitioner.”

3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this case are that the petitioner was working on the post of Senior Vice President (Works) with the Company namely M/s. JK Lakshmi Cement Ltd., situated at Village Malpurikhurd Khasadih, Ahiwara, Tahsil Dhamdha, District Durg. The Company underwent an agreement with one M/s Gannon Dunkerly and Company Ltd., for the purpose of construction of a new cement plant which was duly performed by the latter. The completion of the work was duly informed to the authorities concerned with specific information of the work being over by the last week of January, 2015. The workers, 141 in numbers employed by the contractor were asked to collect their final dues including notice pay as well as compensation under the legal provisions applicable. However, the likely discontinuation of employment caused an agitation at the plant by the labours, which called for intervention of the statutory authorities. It is submitted that by the petitioner that the then Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (C), Raipur extended improper behavior to harass the petitioner and his Company. In such course, a notice dated 4/9.2.2015 was issued by the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (C), Raipur alleging violation of the provisions of Section 25 N (1) (a) & (b) of the ID CT, 1947 and to show-cause in 15 days as to why legal action under Section 29 of the Act be not taken. The petitioner’s Company filed a writ petition being WPL No.46/2015 before this Court against such notice wherein notices were issued on 26.03.2015 by this Court. Meanwhile, amidst all the agitation and protest by the petitioner’s Company and issuance of show-cause notice as stated above, the respondents communicated an inspection report dated 29/30.01.2015 pointing out the shortcomings found in the inspection in the establishment of the petitioner’s Company on 09.01.2015 requesting the Company to rectify the irregularities specified therein immediately and report compliance within a fortnight, failing which, legal action by way of prosecution/claim application would be taken.

4. The petitioner’s Company on being pointed out with the irregularities as stated above, rectified the same and informed the respondents about the same through a letter dated 10.02.2015, i.e. well within the time limit specified in the communication of the respondents as referred above. However, the rectification failed to deter the respondents from filing a complaint before the competent Court under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for short “Act of 1948”), bearing Case No.74/MW Act/2015 dated 20.05.2015 wherein the learned trial Court issued summons vide order dated 01.06.2015.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal proceedings set in motion by the learned trial Court is clearly an abuse of process of law causing a great harassment and agony to the petitioner warranting interference by this Court. He further submits that the forum of Court should not be permitted to be utilized for oblique purposes and when there is no prima facie material against the accused person and the chances of conviction in a criminal case are bleak, no useful purpose can be said to be served by permitting the continuation of criminal prosecution. Learned counsel for the petitioner then referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in