AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The question that this Court was concerned with in the original writ petition, where the order under review was passed, concerned the nature of a
proceeding before a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal in a reference made to it by an appropriate government under Section 12 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947. The question, to be precise, was whether the proceeding can be termed as a proceeding in any court within the meaning of
Section 195 (1)(b) of the Court of Criminal Procedure. Whilst holding the Labour Court and/or the Industrial Court to be a court within the meaning of
Section 195 (1)(b)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Code in the order under review, this Court relied on the statement of law by the Supreme Court in the
case of Lalji Haridas vs. State of Maharashtra 1964) 6 SCR 700 : AIR1964 SC 115.4 Learned Counsel for the Review Petitioner submits that a
subsequent bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Baliram Waman Hiray vs. Justice B. Lentin(1988) 4 SCC 419 has in effect held that the
case of Lalji Haridas is no longer good law after the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Code by insertion of subÂsection (3) in Section 195 in the
present Court. Since this would require consideration, the review petition is admitted and posted for final hearing on 12 December 2018 at 3.00 p.m. In
the meantime, the Labour Court at Mumbai shall not proceed with the application of the second party workman under Section 340 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure till the next date.