- (1.) This Cr.M.P. has been filed for quashing the order dated 13.01.2014 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in connection with C2 Case No.29 of 2014 whereby cognizance under Section 92 of the Factories Act has been taken against the petitioners and also for quashing the entire criminal prosecution arising out of said C2 Case No.29 of 2014.
(2.) The facts, in brief, are that O.P. No.2 filed a prosecution report on 06.01.2014 alleging interalia that the premises of M/s Tata Motors Ltd. was inspected on 28.10.2013 at about 2.00 p.m. and violation of mandatory statutory provisions of Jharkhand Factories Rules, 1950 have been noticed and noted. The inspection report was forwarded to the petitioners on 07.11.2013 vide Memo No.535 whereupon the petitioners had submitted their response on 27.11.2013 vide letter No.156 explaining details about those aspects and denying any lapse on their part. Whereafter O.P. No.2 filed prosecution report vide letter No.04 dated 06.01.2014 in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur whereupon cognizance as aforesaid under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 has been taken against the petitioners alleging petitioner No.1 as Occupier and petitioner No.2 as Manager of the factory.
(3.) It was submitted that the learned A.C.J.M., Jamshedpur without applying judicial mind, has taken cognizance under Section 92 of the Factories Act and directed to issue summons against petitioners. It was pointed out that response made by the petitioners through their letter No.156 dated 27.11.2013 as well as the inspection report are the part of the prosecution report as enclosure but the learned Magistrate did not bother to go through those documents before passing the order impugned and in a mechanical way passed the order of cognizance and directed to issue summons against the petitioners. The learned counsel has relied upon the judgment reported in 1998(5) SCC Para 28 and submitted that summon on an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal law cannot be set in motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set into motion. The order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto.;