JUDGMENT :- Crl. Ap. No. 661 of 1957 : This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Erode, in C.C. No. 185 of 1957.

2. The respondent was prosecuted for an offence under Sec. 6 of the Factories Act read with Sec. 92 and Rule 5(3) of the Madras Factories Rules, 1950. The case is that the respondent, who is the proprietor of a rice mill, was carrying on the business of the rice mill, viz., the manufacturing process of boiling; drying and hulling of paddy in the premises without a licence granted by the Chief Inspector of Factories, Madras, as required by the rules. A rice mill becomes a factory within the definition of that expression in "the Act if he employees 10 or more persons for working on any day.

It is alleged that on 20-3-1957 the Additional Inspector of Factories, Erode 1 Circle, inspected the factory and found 17 workers engaged in the business of manufacturing process of boiling, drying and hulling of paddy. The Additional Inspector of Factories, who is examined as P.W.1, speaks to the fact that he saw 10 men and 7 woman working in the mill. He says he noted down the names of 17 workers and ascertained fro