Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Hridayashwar Jha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. In both the petitions common question of law and similar complaint as well as cognizance order are under challenge that is why both the petitions are being heard together with the consent of the parties.
2. Both the petitions have been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with G.O. No. 190 of 2013 including order taking cognizance dated 28.09.2013, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Saraikella.
3. Heard Mr. A..K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Shweta Singh and Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla learned counsels of the State.
4. O.P. No. 2 instituted a complaint stating therein that M/s Tayo Rolls Limited has its Factory, which is registered under the Factories Act at Large Scale Industrial Estate, Gamharia. On 4.7.2013, a natural death of a contract worker namely Mathura Mandal took place. On enquiry, it was found that late Mathura Mandal was a Supply Labour working in M/s Tayo Rolls Limited. On the date of accident i.e. on 4.7.2013 after coming to duty he started working at his work place i.e. Laddle Refining Furnace Vacuum Degassing Area. Where he was working along with another worker Shri Deva Mukhi and
The court highlighted the importance of considering the obligations of workers and the liability of the occupier and manager under the Factories Act before initiating criminal proceedings.
The interpretation and application of relevant sections of the Factories Act, particularly Sections 97 and 111, are crucial in determining liability for workplace accidents.
The main legal point established is that the Director and Manager cannot be held responsible for an accident without evidence of their involvement, and key provisions of the Factories Act must be con....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a manufacturing process for an organization to be considered a 'factory' under the Factories Act, 1948, and the absence of vi....
Directors are not liable for offences under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, and related sections and rules.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a manufacturing process for an organization to be considered a 'factory' under the Factories Act, and the absence of vicariou....
Point of law : If an order is not obligatory to be passed under the statute, no appeal would lie against the offence alleged under Section 7A(2)(c) of the Factories Act as is alleged in the case at h....
It is well settled that at stage of issuing process, Magistrate is mainly concerned with allegations made in complaint or evidence led in support of same and Magistrate is only to be satisfied that t....
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
