IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must provide clear and convincing evidence to establish the existence of a bonded labour system and the accused's culpability, particularly when dealing with beneficial legislation aimed at protecting vulnerable workers.

JUDGMENT :

Sunder Mohan, J.

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon him vide judgment dated 09.01.2017 in S.C.No.116 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3. (i) It is the case of the prosecution that the accused is the Proprietor of a Brick kiln by name 'V.G.H Brick Kiln'; that he had employed nine labourers including two minors against their wishes and had paid advance of Rs.1,00,000/- to PW1, Rs.55,000/- to PW3, Rs.3,000/- to one Govindaraj and Rs.25,000/- to PW2, who are the heads of their respective families; that he made those witnesses and other witnesses who were members of the family to work in his concern for less than minimum wages and prevented them from moving freely outside the company premises; and that further exploited them since they belonged to the Scheduled Tribe community.

(ii) It is the further case of the prosecution that PW11, the Revenue Divisional Officer of Krishnagiri Division on information that the accused had employed bonded labourers went to the premises on 14.02.2012 and confirmed the fact that they were employed as bonded labourers and rescued them and sent a complaint [Ex.P10] by post to Veppanapalli Police Station; that PW9 registered the FIR [Ex.P9] on 16.02.2012 in Cr.No.19 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 [hereinafter referred to as 'BL Act'], Sections 370, 374, 341, 323, 326 and 506 of the IPC, Section 3 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation Act), 1986 and under the provisions of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989.

(iii) PW15, the Deputy Superintendent of Police was authorised by the Superintendent of Police to investigate since the allegations attracted the offences under the Child Labour Act and the SC and ST (POA) Act. The said authorisation letter was marked as Ex.P13. He went to the Brick Kiln and prepared a Rough Sketch [Ex.P14] in the presence of witnesses and thereafter examined the witnesses, who were kept as bonded labourers. He obtained the caste certificate and thereafter handed over the investigation to PW16. PW16 examined further witnesses and filed the final report, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Krishnagiri.

(iv) On the appearance of the accused, the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C., were complied with, and the case was committed to the Court of Session in S.C.No.116 of 2015 and was made over to the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri, for trial. The trial Court framed charges under Sections 370 IPC r/w Section 17 of the BL Act, 374 IPC r/w Section 16 of the BL Act, Section 3 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation Act), 1986 and under Section 3(2)(6) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 against the accused and when questioned, the accused pleaded 'not guilty'.

(v) To prove the case, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.16 and marked 15 exhibits as Exs.P1 to P15. When the accused was questioned, u/s.313 Cr.P.C., on the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, he denied the same. The accused neither examined any witnesses, nor marked any documents.

(vi) On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found that the prosecution had established the case beyond reasonable doubt and held the accused guilty of the charges under Sections 370 IPC r/w Section 17 of the BL Act and 374 IPC r/w Section 16 of the BL Act and acquitted the accused of the offence under Section 3 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation Act), 1986 and under Section 3(2)(6) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989. The accused was convicted and sentenced as f