The discretion given to the factory inspector to conduct inspections alone or with assistance as per Section 9 of the Factory Act does not automatically invalidate the inspection report.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of proceeding pending before CJM Indore, in Criminal Case No. 15750/2013.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.4.2013 respondent No. 2 factory Inspector inspected a factory named Best Uniforms Pvt. Ltd. Applicant No. 1 is the occupier of that factory and applicant No. 2 is the Manager of that factory in the inspection the inspector found that factory license was not exhibited in factory premises and it was being run without license and some fire extinguisher were not refilled in time. Besides goods lift was not being run by competent person so he prepared a report regarding certain violation of the provisions of Factory Act and filed a complaint against the applicants in the Court of CJM Indore, on which CJM Indore, have taken cognizance against the applicants and for the offences under Section 92 of the Factory Act and registered Criminal Case No. 15750/2013.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that from the perusal of the inspection report it appears that respondent No. 2 Factory Inspector was not accompanied by any person as provided under Section 9 of the Factories Act. At the time of inspection, so no prosecution can be filed against the petitioner because the so called inspection does not fulfil the requirement of Section 9 of the Factory Act.

4. Section 9 of the factory Act specifically provides an Inspector within the local limits for which he is appointed entry with such assistance being person in the service of the government or any local or other public authority or with an expert as he thinks fit, any place which is used or which he has reason to believe is used as a factory. Because the factory inspector at the time of inspection was not accompanied by any person as provided in Section 9 of the Factory Act so prosecution against the petitioner is pending in the Court of CJM Indore, as Criminal Case 15750/2013 of that report be quashed.

5. In this regard learned Counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the judgment delivered by this Court in case of H.K. Kala v. State of M.P. reported in MPLJ 2008 (3) page 526 in which this Court held :

"Factories Act, 1948 Sections 8, 9, 92 and 105 Rail Spring Factory - A small explosion took place in Deep Plaint Plant - Factory Inspector could have entered the factory premises with an expert as provided under Section 9 of the Act - However, Factory Inspector all alone went inside the factory and submitted a report - Factory Inspector was not a specialist/expert, on the basis of whose report, the complaint was entertained under Section 105 of the Act - Held - A small explosion was taken place when the plant was being switched on. Merely because the petitioners are occupiers of the Factory - They cannot be prosecuted by filing a complaint under Section 105 of the Act in view of the fact that provisions of Section 9 was not complied with by the Factory Inspector - Proceedings initiated against the petitioners under Section 105 of the Act which are pending before the Labour Court are quashed.

But the fact of that case is clearly distinguishable because in that case the factory Inspector inspected the factory after explosion took place to know the cause of explosion so Court on the ground that Factory Inspector is not an expert held that prosecution cannot be initiated on that report.

6. Learned Counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on this Court judgment passed in M.Cr.C. No. 1916/2014 dated 1.3.2016 Shiv Singh Mehta and ors. v. State of M.P. but here also Inspector inspected the factory after accident in which a worker received injury but in the instant case Inspector did not inspect the factory after any accident but only in a routine manner as appears from the report.

7. Section 9 of Factory Act reads as thus:-

Powers of Inspectors.-Subject to any rules made in this behalf, in Inspector may, within the local limits for which he is appointed,-

(a) enter, with such assistants being person