AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.R. Shah, J.
1 The present application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the Petitioner original accused partner of Milak Plastic Industries, Gandhidham-Kutchh to quash and set aside the complaint being C.R. No. II-3082 of 2011 registered with Gandhidham "B" Division Police Station, Gandhidham-Kutchh for the offences punishable under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000.
Respondent No. 2 herein original complainant has lodged the aforesaid FIR against the applicant with Gandhidham "B" Division Police Station being C.R. No. II-3082 of 2011 alleging inter-alia that on the day of surprise visit/ inspection of the factory of the Petitioner on 25/03/2011, it was found that four girls, who were found to be minors were working in the factory of the Petitioner at the relevant time and, therefore, it is alleged that the Petitioner has committed an offences punishable under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000 as it was found that child labourers were working in the factory of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned complaint/FIR, the Petitioner original accused has preferred the present application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash and set aside the impugned complaint/FIR.
Mr. N.D. Nanavati, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. Mankad, learned advocate appearing in behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000. He has further submitted that not a single ingredient of the aforesaid offences is made out against the applicant and, therefore, to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicant would be abuse of process of law and Court. Therefore, it is requested to exercise
Mr. L.B. Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 has stated that on investigation, it has been found that out of four minors, two minors girls were found to be working in the Petitioner''s factory at the relevant time. He has also stated that even names of the girls have been mentioned in the complaint/FIR and, therefore, it is requested not to exercise the power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and not to quash and set aside the impugned complaint/FIR at this stage.
Having heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length and considering averments and allegations made in the complaint/FIR as well as statements of the power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to quash and set aside the impugned complaint/FIR. minor girls, whose names have been mentioned in the complaint/FIR and who were found to be working in the factory of the Petitioner and considering the same, this Court is of the opinion that no case is made out against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 370 and 374 of Indian Penal Code as well as Section 26 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000. Section 26 of the said Act, reads as under:
Exploitation of juvenile or child employee. -Whoever ostensibly procures a juvenile or the child for the purpose of any hazardous employment keeps him in bondage and withholds his earnings or uses such earning for his own purposes shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
Nothing is on record that girls, who were found to be working in the factory of the Petitioner were working in hazardous employment and kept in bondage and/or Petitioners have withhold their earning and/or the Petitioner was using such earnings for his own purposes. Statements of the Girls are on the contrary. Even no case is made out for the offences punishable under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears to the Court that to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicant would be abuse of process of law and Court. This Court is of the opinion that the case falls within the parameter laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, and this is a fit case to exercise the power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the application succeeds. The impugned complaint/FIR being C.R. No. II-3082 of 2011 registered with Gandhidham "B" Division Police Station, Gandhidham-Kutchh for the offences punishable under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000 against the applicant is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.