- (1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) THIS application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 15.6.2011 passed by the then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Bariatu P.S. Case no.78 of 2011 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 370, 374 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 16 and 18 of the Bonded Labour Act which seems to have wrongly recorded in place of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act as well as under Sections 23 and 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has been taken against the petitioner. Mr.Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that one Anna Oraon, a girl aged about 18 years was doing domestic work in the house of the petitioner. She unfortunately fell down from the 3rd floor of the house and died on 4.3.2011. Information to that effect was given to the concerned police station, upon which a U.D case was registered. After a week, a regular case was lodged against the petitioner by one Tulsi Prasad, Sub - Inspector, Bariatu Police Station stating therein that one Manoj Kumar, cousin of Anna Oraon did inform that he had brought the deceased to do household work of the father of the petitioner five years before but since last two years she was doing household work of this petitioner at Ranchi, she was not being taken care of properly though work was being taken from her round the clock and that she was not being allowed to go her village home nor she was being paid adequately. On such allegation, a case was registered as Bariatu P.S. Case no.78 of 2011 under Sections 370, 374 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 16 and 18 of the Bonded Labour Act which be read as Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act as well as under Sections 23 and 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The matter was taken up for investigation. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted, upon which cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 370, 374 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 16 and 18 of the Bonded Labour Act as well as under Sections 23 and 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 was taken against the petitioner, vide order dated 15.6.2011 which is under challenge. Mr.Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no case is made out so far the offence under Section 16 and 18 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act is concerned as the victim, in the face of allegation, cannot be said to have been working under Bonded Labour System and only in case the work is being taken under Bonded Labour System, one can be prosecuted under the provision of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.
(3.) IN this regard it was further submitted that none of the conditions mentioned in Clause (g) of Section 2 defining 'Bonded Labour System' gets fulfilled and therefore, the victim cannot be said to have been working under the Bonded Labour System. None of the witnesses including father of the deceased has said anything so as to attract the offence under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 .;