Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

S Harishankar vs State Of Karanataka

High Court Of Karnataka|14 March, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6715 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
S HARISHANKAR S/O LATE SELVAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS THEN WORKING AS MANAGER, ADMINISTRATION, M/S SKYLINE CONSTRUCTION AND HOUSING PVT. LTD., HAYEES ROAD, BANGALORE-25. NOW AT NO. 1273, 4TH “A” CROSS SHANMUGA NILAYAM MANJUNATH NAGAR, R T NAGAR BANGALORE-32 (BY SRI: S B HALLUR, ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARANATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR 8TH CIRCLE, KARMIKARA BHAVANA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU-29 ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S. 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE MMTC 1ST COURT AT MAYOHALL, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.861/2010.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioner is accused No.2 in C.C.No.861/2010. Said proceedings are initiated by the Senior Labour Inspector, Bangalore for the offences punishable under section 20(2) and Rule 22 of Payment of Wages Act, 1936. The Director of M/s. Skyline Constructions & Housing Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru is made as accused No.1. The petitioner herein in arraigned as accused No.2.
2. The records indicate that on issuance of summons, accused No.1 pleaded guilty and has been convicted for the above offences and is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,900/-. In view of this order, the proceedings initiated against the present petitioner cannot be sustained. Moreover, there are no specific allegation that the petitioner herein was an employer of the concern. In the absence of any averments in the complaint that the petitioner herein was responsible either for supervision and control of employees or that he was involved in payment of Wages, the petitioner herein cannot be prosecuted for the alleged violation committed by the employer viz., accused No.1. Hence, the petition deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.861/2010 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court-1, Bengaluru is quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE *mn/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

S Harishankar vs State Of Karanataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 March, 2019
Judges
  • John Michael Cunha