1. All these criminal appeals are preferred by the Provident Fund Inspector, Anantapur, who is the complainant before the trial court, challenging the order of acquittal dated 22-2-1991 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, - Guntakal, in S.T.C. Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 to 13 of 1987, on his file.

2. The complainant - Provident Fund Inspector, Anantapur, filed a complaint against the accused for the offence under S.14 (1A), 14 A(1) and 14A(2) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 , as the accused have failed to remit the employer's share of provident fund.

3. The lower court held that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused relate to the months of July, August and September, 1984, and the complaint, having been filed on 19-9-1985, is definitely barred by limitation according to S.468, Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate has also relied upon the decision reported in E.P.F. Organisation v. M/s. Shalimar Biscuits , 1979 (1) APLJ ( HC) 173 to come to the above conclusion. It was observed in that decision as follows : -
"The Employees Provident Fund Act does not provide special procedure to be followed in respect of the prosecution laun