IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102593 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

1. RAVI PISHERODI AGE 61 YEARS OCC :RETIRED EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR R/O TATA MOTORS LIMITED P.B. ROAD, BELUR INDUSTRIAL AREA DHARWAD-580011.

2. JAIRAM AGE :62 YEARS OCC :RETIRED DIVISIONAL MANAGER R/O TATA MOTORS LIMITED, P.B. ROAD, BELUR INDUSTRIAL AREA DHARWAD-580011.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI ABHINANDAN M GUNDWADE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA signed by MALATESH BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR K C HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Location: DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD HIGH THROUGH LABOUR INSPECTOR COURT OF DHARWAD-580001 KARNATAKA

2. SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR

1^ST CIRCLE, 6^TH CROSS MARATHA COLONY DHARWAD-580003 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO PASS AN ORDER, TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 AND 3/PETITIONERS, IN CC NO.1182/2015 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 22A OF MINIMUM WAGES ACT, ON THE FILE OF I ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, DHARWAD.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Heard Sri Abhinandan M.G., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Girija Hiremath, leanred High Court Government Pleader for the respondents.

2. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with the following prayer:

“To quash the entire proceedings against the Accused No.1 and 3/Petitioners, in C.C.No.1182/2015, for the alleged offence U/sec.22A of Minimum Wages Act, on the file of I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Court, Dharwad.”

3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:

3.1. Petitioners were working as Executive Director and Divisional Manager in Tata Motors Limited, P.B. road, Belur Industrial Area, Dharwad.

4. Respondent No.2 initiated criminal prosecution against the petitioners and others under Section 22(b) and Section 2(b) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 before the First Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Dharwad, alleging the violation of Rules punishable under Section 22(1)(i)(a), Rules 28 (2) and 29(b1) of the Minimum Wages Rules, 1958 and punishable under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948. 5. Second respondent contended that on 09.09.2015 when he visited the Tata Motors Limited company for inspection of records, petitioners herein did not co-operate and produce the necessary books of account as is required under the Minimum Wages Act in respect of the employees of the company.

6. In that regard, a report was prepared by respondent No.2 and a notice was issued on 10.09.2015 which was served on the Tata Motors Limited company demanding the reasons for not providing the payment register book.

7. It is further case of the respondent No. 2 that there was no compliance to the callings of notice nor there was any suitable reply.

8. Learned trial Magistrate after receipt of the complaint, without holding any further enquiry registered the case as C.C.No.1182/2015. Petitioner challenged the said order in Crl.R.P.No.78/2016.

9. Learned District Judge without noticing the flaw in not following the procedure required to be adopted by the learned Magistrate in registering the case, dismissed the revision petition.

10. Being further aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.

11. Sri Abhinandan M.G., learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, contented that approach of the trial Magistrate as well as the learned District Judge in the criminal petition is up against the procedure established under the Minimum Wages Act. Therefore, sought for quashing of the pending criminal case against the petitioners.

12. In support of his arguments, he places reliance on the order rendered in Criminal Petition No.1024