JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. By way of present application, the applicant-original accused has prayed for the following reliefs:

8. (A) be pleased to admit and allow the present petition.

(B) be pleased to quash the impugned complaint being the Criminal Case No. 08/2019 dated 26/02/2019 filed by the respondent no. 2 before the Labour Court, Navsari, order dated 26/02/2019 taking cognizance and the process issued in it at Annex. A (Colly.) for the offences punishable under section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948.

(C) be pleased to stay the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 08/2019 dated 26/02/2019 filed by the respondent no. 2 before the Labour Court, Navsari, order dated 26/02/2019 taking cognizance and the process issued in it at Annex. A (Colly.) for the offences punishable under section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 pending hearing till final disposal of the present petition.

(D) be pleased to grant ad-interim relief in terms of the above mentioned clause.

(E) be pleased to grant such other and further relief as the nature and circumstances of the present case may require in the interest of justice.

3. The brief facts of the case are as under:

3.1 That the Society is engaged in the activity of procuring, processing and distribution of milk and milk products procured through its members and is doing the same for almost 47 years now since its inception. There has been no untoward incident or accident or any complaint by any Authority under the Labour Law against the Society or its officials except for the present complaint.

3.2 The Respondent No. 2 had visited the factory premises of applicant on 18/12/2018 alongwith Joint Director, Directorate of Industrial Safety and Health and Factory Inspector had given a visit note for the same inter-alia making various observations. The alleged issue in question for which the criminal Complaint is filed was observed at S. No. 4 in the said Inspection Note. As per the same, the Society had employed more than 500 workers and yet Welfare officer was not appointed by the Society and hence breach of Sec. 49 of the Factories Act was sought to be done.

3.3 That the applicant had satisfactorily replied to all the observations and the same were also accepted by the respondent no. 2. The applicant had also filed details reply alongwith annexure on 16.01.2019 after receipt of the Inspection note. The applicant submits that as per the observations, the applicant had appointed a Welfare Officer and the appointment letter thereof also formed a part of the said reply. The said reply was received by the office of the respondent no. 2 on 18.01.2019.

3.4 That without considering the reply or the annexure thereto, without any further communication or intimation or show cause notice, straightway, a criminal complaint came to be filed on 26.02.2019 although the observations were complied with. Moreover, the applicant is directly shown as the accused without there being any proof whatsoever on whether the applicant was directly responsible for the alleged offence. The applicant came to know about the same on receipt of summons. The applicant appeared through it advocate and sought for time and the matter is adjourned. Hence, the present applicant is herein with the present application.

4. Heard Mr. K.M. Patel, learned senior advocate with Mr. Yogi Gadhia, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned advocate for the respondent no. 1-State.

5. Mr. K.M. Patel, learned senior advocate for the applicant has submitted that prima-facie the complaint is filed under Section-49 read with Section-92 of the Factories Act by the Inspector, is not maintainable in eye of law. He has submitted that though the compliance report is already submitted by the authority much prior to filing of the complaint. He has drawn my attention towards complaint, which is filed on 26.06.2019 and pu