NAVRATAN PUGALIA Vs. ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, EMPLOY-EES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZ-ATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant application is filed by the petitioners who are proprietor and Manager of Ranibari Tea estate and Madhu Sudhan Tea estate under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the criminal proceeding in G.R. case No. 219 of 2003 under Sections 406/409 IPC pending in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.

(2.) HEARD Mr. A. K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on instructions of Mr. S. Ghosh, learned lawyer on record. Also heard Mr. A. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned P.P. appe -aring for the respondent -state

(3.) THE learned Sub -Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dharmanagar, upon receipt of the charge sheet took cognizance of the offence under Section 406/409 IPC against the three accused including the present petitioners and thereafter transfer the case to the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dharmanagar for disposal of the case in accordance with law. Appearing before the learned Magistrate, the petitioners made a prayer for discharging them. They have also raised question of maintainability of prosecution as the complainant did not obtain sanction as required under Section 14 of the Act. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties on question of maintainability held that for prosecution under penal code, previous sanction of the Central Provident Fund Commissioner or any other officer as authorized by the Central Govt. is not necessary, such previous sanction is necessary only in case of prosecution under any provisions of the Act and finally rejected the prayer for discharging them from prosecution vide his order dated 2.8.2004 and directed the petitioners to appear on 6.10.2004 for framing of charge.