Allowed

M.v.Ramanamurthy v. The Deputy Director

Madras HC20 Jun 2024CRL OP(MD)/12232/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner manager of NLC India Solar Power Plant moved to quash a charge sheet under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court observed the respondent failed to obtain prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. before filing the private complaint under Section 105 of the Factories Act against the public servant. The charge sheet was quashed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.306 of 2021 is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

M.v.Ramanamurthy Vs The Deputy Director — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD).No.12232 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.06.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P(MD)No.12232 of 2021 and Crl.MP(MD)Nos.6283 & 6284 of 2021

¶7

M.V.Ramanamurthy, S/o.P.Simmanna, Manager, NLC India Solar Power Plant, Paralachi, Arupukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District. ... Petitioner / Accused

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Deputy Director, Inductrial Safety and Health-1, Door No.6/461 Post Office Colony, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondent / Complainant

¶10

PRAYER:- Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in connection with the impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.306 of 2021 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur and quash the same against the petitioner as illegal.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Gobikrishnan For Respondent : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

1/5

¶14

Crl.O.P(MD).No.12232 of 2021

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.306 of 2021 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur.

¶17

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Manager of NLC India Solar Power Plant at Paralachi, Arupukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District. On 09.10.2020, at about 01.45 p.m, the respondent conducted inspection in the above said plant and found that the said NLC India Solar Power Plant has violated and breached the Acts and Rules for not maintaining the Labour Attendance Register properly along with Form III under Section 4(1)(b)(i) Factories Act, 1988 and Amendment Rules, 2014, which is liable to be punished under Section 6(a) of the Factories Act, 1988 with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the first time. Hence, the respondent filed a private complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.306 of 2021 for the offence under Section 6(a) of the Factories Act, 1948 and under Rule 4(1)(b)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

2/5

¶20

Crl.O.P(MD).No.12232 of 2021

¶21

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is a Grade-A Officer, working in 'Navratna' Government of India Enterprise under the Ministry of coal. Since the petitioner being public servant, the respondent ought to have obtained prior sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C., before instituting the complaint under Section 105 of Factories Act. Hence, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner Hence, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner is clear abuse of process of law. Accordingly, he prayed to quash the impugned charge sheet.

¶22

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent fairly conceded that prior sanction has to be obtained by the respondent.

¶23

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.

¶24

From the perusal of records, it is seen that the prior sanction has not been obtained by the respondent before instituting the complaint

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

3/5

¶27

Crl.O.P(MD).No.12232 of 2021

¶28

against the petitioner under Section 105 of Factories Act. On that sole ground, this Court is inclied to allow this petition.

¶29

7.Accordingly, the impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.306 of 2021

¶30

on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur, is hereby quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶31

20.06.2024 2/3

¶32

NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No dss

¶33

¶34

1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur

¶35

2.The Deputy Director, Inductrial Safety and Health-1, Door No.6/461 Post Office Colony, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

¶36

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

4/5

¶39

Crl.O.P(MD).No.12232 of 2021

¶40

A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.

¶41

dss

¶42

Crl.O.P(MD)No.12232 of 2021 and Crl.MP(MD)Nos.6283 & 6284 of 2021

¶43

20.06.2024

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

5/5

M.v.Ramanamurthy v. The Deputy Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.v.Ramanamurthy v. The Deputy Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samiyapillai Vs The Inspector of Police

V.K.R.Akkiyasamy Vs Indira @ Kamu

S. Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police

Samlee Vs M.Rengarajan

M.v.Ramanamurthy Vs The Deputy Director

K.Ganesan Vs The Deputy Director