- (1.) The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of complaint No 2569/2008 dated 8.12.2008 and summoning order dated 8.12.2008 vide which the petitioner has been summoned under Section 14(2) of the Employee Provident & Misc Provisions Act, 1952 read with Section 76(B) of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 (for short "the Act").
(2.) Notice of motion was issued on 10.9.2009.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the judgment of Karnataka High Court in C.B. Bhandari v. Provident Fund Inspector Bangalore, 1988 2 LLJ 400, Jharkhand High Court in Satyanarayan Kauntia & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and others, 2010 5 RCR(Cri) 259, Bombay High Court in Transport Corporation of India Ltd. and others v. R.M. Gandhi and others, 1999 3 LLJ 312, Relied of Calcutta High Court in Wire Machinery Manufacturing Corporation Ltd. and others v. State and another, 1978 CrLJ 839 contends that there is no deliberate violation of the Act by the petitioner. The present complaint pertains to the period 1981-82 and the same was filed after a delay of more than 27 years, which is not maintainable and the same A liable to be quashed on the ground of limitation alone. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in the complaint which is filed after expiry of period of limitation, the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence as non-filing of the return is not a continuing offence. The complaint cannot be filed after expiry of period of limitation and the summoning order has been passed without taking into consideration the period of limitation and the fact that it is not a continuing offence.;