Yashoda Nandan, J. - (1.) RESPONDENTS Lala Ram Gopal Gupta, Lala Ram Prasad Gupta, Lala Pushpa Kumar Gupta and Sri S.D. Garg who are admittedly the Directors of the Lakshmi Ratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd., Kanpur - -hereinafter referred so as the Company - -were convicted by a learned Magistrate of the First Class Under Section 14(2 -A) of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 - -hereinafter referred to as the Act and each one of them was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 300/ -. The learned Magistrate ordered that on failure to pay the fine imposed, the defaulter shall undergo a period of one month's simple imprisonment. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Kanpur, allowed it and set aside the convictions and sentences of the Respondents. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the State has appealed to this Court.
(2.) THE Respondents were prosecuted in consequence of a complaint filed "by Sri S.A. Ali, a Provident Fund Inspector appointed Under Section 13(1) of the Act alleging that the provisions of the Act are applicable to the Company of which the Respondents being the Directors and being incharge of and responsible to the Company for the conduct of its business are "employers" within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Act and responsible for complying with the provisions thereof in relation to that Establishment. It was alleged in the complaint that by a Notification No. E -102 (19) -E/A dated 17th October, 1957, published under S.R.O. 3416 in Part II Section 3 of the Gazette of India dated 26th October, 1957, the Company had been granted exemption Under Section 17(1)(a) of the Act. According to the complaint, the Respondents had failed to invest in Central Government Securities the employers and employees provident fund contributions for the months of July, August and September, 1965 within tie requisite period and had thereby contravened Condition No. 4(c) Contained in Son. II attached to the aforesaid Notification, subject to which exemption had been granted to the Company Under Section 17(1)(a) of the Act. It was alleged an evidence was given to the effect that the prosecution of the Respondents and of the Company was being launched after obtaining sanction therefore from the Labour Commissioner, U.P., Kanpur, who had been specified as the authority for that purpose in accordance with the requirements of Section 14(3) of the Act. Each one of the Respondents admitted that the Act was applicable to the Company which was a Factory and also that it had been granted exemption Under Section 17(1)(a) thereof. They feigned ignorance as to whether the accumulated contributions made by the employers and employees of the Company for the months of July, August and September, 1965, had been invested in the Central Government securities or not.
(3.) IN support of the prosecution case were examined Sri Lakshmi Shankar Awasthi, Head Clerk of the Office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, U.P. Region, Kanpur and Sri S.A. Ali, an Inspector, appointed Under Section 13(1) of the Act. A number of documents were also produced. No evidence was led by the Respondents in their defence.;