The existence of a sanctioned plan for factory construction and an agreement providing for necessary facilities can render allegations of non-compliance unsustainable.

JUDGMENT :

1. I.A. No. 9713 of 2022 has been filed for deletion of the name of the petitioner no. 1 who has left for his heavenly abode.

2. In view of averments made in I.A, prayer made in I.A. is allowed.

3. Let the name of petitioner no. 1 be deleted from the array of the parties.

4. Heard Mr. V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2.

5. The present petition has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dated 03.09.2012 passed in connection with C/2 Case No. 417 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Jamshedpur.

6. The O.P. No. 2-Factory Inspector, Jamshedpur Circle No. 1 has filed the complaint case alleging therein that on 04.06.2012 he had inspected the premises of M/s Tata Yazaki Autocomp (P) Ltd. situated at Bay No. 9 & 10 of outer complex (inside the Tata Motors Ltd.) and found the following violations:

i. The plan lay out of the factory has not been sanctioned under the Jharkhand Factory Rules which is violation of Rule 3 of Jharkhand Factory Rules.

ii. There are 226 female workmen but in spite thereof, the management has not made provisions for creches as per Rules 72 to 76 of the Jharkhand Factories Rules read with Section 48 of the Factories Act.

iii. No trained person or medicines etc. were found as prescribed under Section 45(3) of the Factories Act read with Rule 64 (c) (e) and (f) of the Factories Rules.

iv. At the time of inspection the register relating to the workmen was not produced before the complainant on 18.06.2012 which is in violation of rule 102 of the Factories Rules.

7. Mr. V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the factory has been constructed by the company of the petitioners, M/s Tata Yazaki Autocomp (P) Ltd. on the basis of plan duly sanctioned by the competent authority under the Factories Act vide Annexure- 2. He further submits that in view of Clause 4 of the Report, the grievance has been raised with regard to construction of roof at measuring 100 ft x 60 ft. over the machine area. He further submits that allegation in the complaint with regard to construction of factory without any approved plan itself, is falsified in view of annexure-2. He further submits that the complainant has also admitted that this factory is situated within the factory premises of M/s Tata Motors Ltd. and an agreement arrived between M/s Tata Motors Ltd. and M/s Tata Yazaki Pvt. limited that all facilities shall be provided to the M/s Tata Yazaki (P) limited for entire infrastructure like canteen, ambulance, drinking water facility, sanitation facility and other medical facilities etc. was already there and the factory in question was in the same premises. He further submits that allegation with regard to not providing creches to the female worker is also falsified in view of said agreement. He submits that a detailed show cause was filed by the company disclosing all these facts insptie of that complaint case has been filed. On these grounds, he submits that to allow the criminal proceeding to continue will amount the abuse of process of the Court.

8. On the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, learned counsel for the State submits that the allegations are there for non compliance of certain provisions of the Factories Act, that is why the complaint has been filed.

9. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court has gone through the materials on record and finds that admittedly complaint was filed for violation of certain provision with regard to creches and medical facilities are not provided by the company. The allegation is also made that the factory was constructed without any sanctioned plan. In view of annexure-2 it is crystal clear that sanction of the construction of factory is already there and further in view of Annexure-4 agreement between M/s Tata Motors Ltd. and M/s Ta