The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund Act, 1952, and the consideration of evidence related to the petitioner's resignation and the release of his Provident Fund amount.

JUDGMENT

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. - Prayer in these petition is for setting aside the judgments dated 29.08.2014 passed by the trial Court vide which, the petitioner was held guilty for an offence punishable under Section 14 (1-A) and 14 A of the Employees' Provident Fund & Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act') as well as the orders dated 30.08.2014 vide which the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 06 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each in all the 06 complaints and the judgments dated 26.05.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, vide which the appeals filed by the petitioner challenging the aforesaid judgments were dismissed.

2. Since, the common question of law is involved in all the six complaints, they are being disposed of by common judgment.

CRR-2145-2015

3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant filed a criminal complaint No. 45-II dated 06.10.2009 with the allegations he was appointed as Inspector under Section 13 of the Act and is a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of IPC. It was further contended that M/s Aravali Pipes Ltd. 5 K.M. Hansi Road, Hissar (herein after to be referred as "the said establishment") was an establishment covered under the Act. The code number of the said establishment is HR/7408. It was further averred that the petitioner, being General Manager (Works) and V.K.Bansal being occupier were responsible for the conduct of the business of the said establishment. They were required to comply with all the provisions of the Act. Under paragraph 4 of the Employee's Pension Scheme, 1995, the accused are required to pay the Employer's contribution to the pension Fund in respect of the employees of the said establishment for every month within 15 days of the close of the month. In spite of the several requests, the accused failed to pay the Pension Fund Contribution for the following period:-

4. It was further mentioned that petitioner-D.N.Singla and V.K.Bansal being Director and owner of the said establishment respectively, were in charge of the said establishment during the relevant period and they were responsible for the conduct of its business. Due to their neglect, they had failed to comply with the provisions of the Act and as such, they had committed offence under the Act. The sanction to file the above prosecution complaint was granted by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner vide his sanction order dated 11.09.2009.

5. Thereafter, the trial Court summoned the petitioner to face the trial for commission of offence punishable under Section 14 (1-A) and 14 A of the Act and, thereafter, notice of accusation was served upon the petitioner and his co-accused, namely, V.K.Bansal (since deceased).

CRR-2146 to 2150 of 2015

6. The facts in all these five cases were identical to the facts noticed above except the month and employees' share qua which the separate complaints were filed.

7. In all the cases, PW1-P.D.Singhmar, retired Enforcement Officer/Accounts Officer, has appeared and stated that during the period, mentioned in the complaints, the said establishment did not deposit its contribution of provident fund of its employees and despite notice and inquiries, the contribution was not deposited. This witness, in his statement, tendered following documents:-

"Ex. P-1: Copy of allotment of Code no. for new coverage of PF.

Ex.P-2: Copy of application of the Employees' Provident Fund.

Ex.P-3: Copy of Form No.5A filled up by the employer.

Ex.P-4: Copy of summon to accused no. 1 to appear in person.

Ex.P-5: copy of bailable warrants to accused no.3.

Ex.P-6: Copy of final order under section 7A of the Act dated 8.2.2007.

Ex.P-7: copy of sanction order dated 1