Back
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Shrikant Madhav Vaidya, s/o Madhav Damodar Vaidya – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in Complaint Case No. 3166 of 2022 by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 92 and 96A of the Factories Act, 1948 inter alia against the petitioner, who is the Chairman-cum-non-Executive Director of Hindustan Uvarak Rasayan Limited (HURL), Jharia- cum- Jharpokhar- cum- Sindri which is a public sector undertaking of Government of India.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner being the director of the said company; in an unsafe manner, without personal protective equipment was getting the works done in the said Hindustan Uvarak Rasayan Limited (HURL), Sindri, Dhanbad due to which on 10.01.2022; while conducting the stability test of the Transformer, because of flash over in the main substation panel, during the work, two workers respectively Shri Ashish Kumar Mandal and Shri Mathavan V, got scorched. It is further alleged that the work was exec
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....
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....
Directors are not liable for offences under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, and related sections and rules.
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....
The complaints were an abuse of process of court, as there was no violation of law and rules and regulations, and the complaints were filed belatedly. The non-mention of the show cause notice and its....
The court held that only one director of a company can be prosecuted for violations under specific sections of the Factories Act, affirming a strict interpretation of legislative intent.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to safety regulations in factories, clarifying the applicability of the Factories Act even with fewer than ten workers, and addressing procedural errors....
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
