SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(All) 304

HARI SWARUP
Maidhan Gupta – Appellant
Versus
U. P. – Respondent


HARI SWARUP, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision has been filed against the order of the Sessions Judge by which he dismissed the applicants revision.

( 2 ) A complaint was filed against the applicants for an offence under Section 409 I- P. C. The allegations were that the accused being the employers had deducted from the wages of the complainant and the other workmen the amount which they were liable to contribute under the Employees Provident Funds Act but had not deposited the same as required by law. It was alleged that the accused had misappropriated this amount and were accordingly liable to be punished for an offence under Section 409 I. P. C.

( 3 ) THE accused in the case filed as application praying that the prosecution be not continued as the same was barred by Section 403 Criminal P. C and also by the absence of sanction contemplated by Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Employees Provident Funds Act. The contention of the accused was that on their committing default in making the deposit of the amounts deducted out of the employees wages, they had already been prosecuted and punished under Section 14 of the Employees Provident Funds Act, and were accordingly not liable to be prose








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top