S. Malik, J. - (1.) THIS is a Government Appeal against the judgment dated 10 -7 -1967 passed by Shri P.K. Misra, Magistrate 1st Class, Allahabad, acquitting Kailash Chandra Bhargava who was prosecuted as manager and employer of M/s. Kailash Paper Trading Company situate at 10, Sheo Charan Lal Road, Allahabad, Under Section 35 of the UP Shops and Commercial Establishment Act, 1962 (UP Dookan Aur Vanijya Adhishthan Adhiniyam, 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE relevant facts not controverted in this Court are that inspector J.K. Singh who was the only witness examined by the prosecution during the trial, inspected the said establishment on 28 -9 -1966 at about 2.30 P.M. in the presence of the accused. According to the prosecution, during the inspection the inspector found that no leave register or inspection book was being maintained and that the signature of Bharat Lal, an employee of the firm, was not being obtained in the prescribed column of the attendance register and that the names of two other employees, R.N. Misra and Sarvajit Singh who were working as employees of the firm since three months before the date of inspection, were not entered in the attendance register. It was further alleged that particulars of employment of the said employees were not shown in the prescribed column of the attendance register. It is said that due to the omissions and irregularities pointed out the accused contravened the provisions of Section 32 of the Act read with Rules 18 and 20 of the Rules framed under the Act.
(3.) THE accused pleaded not guilty and alleged that the registers in question were maintained by the manager of the firm who had left the firm without making over charge and therefore, the registers etc. were not traceable. It was further alleged that R.N. Misra and Sarvajit Singh were casual hands and were not employees of the firm under the Act as they came under the provisions of Clause (b) of Sub -section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. The other irregularities and omissions alleged by the prosecution were denied.;