EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION Vs. RAVTI RAMAN GUPTA (DIRECTOR)
LAWS(P&H)-2008-1-181
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on January 24,2008

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION Appellant
VERSUS
Ravti Raman Gupta (Director) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

L.N. Mittal, J. - (1.) THE instant criminal revision petition has been filed by Employees State Insurance Corporation (in short - 'the Corporation') impugning judgment dated 12.07.2003 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby appeal of respondent Ravti Raman Gupta was allowed and judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.02.2001 of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana were set aside and the respondent was acquitted.
(2.) THE petitioner -Corporation filed complaint under Section 406 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code against respondent Ravti Raman Gupta as Director, Manager and Principal Employer of M/s Hindustan Exports (Pvt.) Limited, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') inter alia on the allegations that the respondent did not deposit employees' contribution deducted out of their salary with the petitioner and misappropriated the same. Charge under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the respondent, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) THE prosecution, in support of its case, examined three witnesses. Ravi Bhatia (PW -1) and J.C. Dhingra (PW -2) - officials of the petitioner -Corporation broadly stated according to the prosecution version but admitted in cross -examination that they had never visited the premises of the Company or the respondent. In other words, they had no knowledge that respondent Ravti Raman Gupta is Manager or Principal Employer of the Company. H.S. Khanna (PW -3), who is Inspector of the petitioner - Corporation, stated that he inspected the record of the Company vide his Report Ex.P -3/A and some representative of the Company gave statement Annexure P -3/A -1 regarding deductions of ESI contribution made from the salary of the employees. Complainant's counsel also tendered letter Ex. A -Y allegedly sent by the respondent to the Corporation for registration of the Company under the Employees State Insurance Corporation Act, along with necessary form Ex. A -X. Another document Mark -A was also tendered, said to have been signed by the respondent on behalf of the Company.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.