Telangana High Court
J.Srinivasulu, vs Employees State Insurance ... on 10 March, 2025
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8 OF 2012
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused, aggrieved by
the conviction recorded by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class to
try the Offences under the ESI Act and Chairman, Industrial
Tribunal-I at Hyderabad, in P.C.No.223 of 2002, dated
16.12.2011, for the offences punishable under Section 85(a) and
85 (e) of the ESI Act.
2. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the complainant is
a public servant and that the accused is the Proprietor of M/s.Sri
Balaji Paper Board Industries, situated at Kallur, Kurnool District.
The said industry was a covered unit under the provisions of the
ESI Act with effect from 01.03.1992, and a code number vide 52
9554 84 has been allotted to facilitate the compliance under the
provisions of the ESI Act. The accused was the person-in-charge of
the said industry during the material time and he is the principal
employer. As per the ESI Act, every Principal employer is liable to
pay both shares of contributions, i.e., the employer share of the
contribution, as well as the employee share of the contribution in
the first instance, and later, entitled to recover the same from the
wages of the employees. According to the Complainant
Corporation, the Inspector of the complainant Corporation
inspected the factory on 30.10.2001, and found that the accused
has not paid the contributions amounting to Rs.1,471/- for the
period October, 2000 to September 2001. Therefore, a show cause
notice was issued on 19.03.2002 as to why the accused should
not be prosecuted for the non-compliance under the provisions of
the ESI Act. The accused neither responded to the said notice, nor
complied with the provisions of the ESI Act. According to the
Complainant, the accused also failed to submit the returns of the
contribution in quadruplicate in Form-6, along with receipted
copies of challans, for the period that ended on 31.03.2001 and
30.09.2001. The Joint Director, who has been authorized by the
Director General, ESI Corporation, accorded sanction on
12.07.2002. After receiving the sanction, the complaint was filed
against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections
85(a) and 85(e) of the ESI Act. The Court below, after concluding
trial, found the appellant guilty.
3. The main ground urged by the appellant before the Court
below is that he is not the Proprietor of M/s.Balaji Paper Board
Industries, but, one Girish Yadav is the owner of the said
Industry. Mr.Girish Yadav purchased the said Industry in the year
1995, and as a principal employer, Girish Yadav is liable to pay
the contributions to the ESI Corporation.
4. However, no one was examined to show that the company
was sold to Mr.Girish Yadav. In fact, said Girish Yadav was also
not examined by the appellant before the Court below.
5. In the said circumstances, the Court below found that the
appellant is liable, and accordingly, convicted him.
6. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the litigation
pertains to the year 2002, and nearly 23 years have passed by.
Further, the appellant is now aged above 50 years and has
dependents to look after.
7. Considering the said submission of the learned counsel,
while maintaining the conviction, the sentence of imprisonment of
the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Fine component remains unaltered.
8. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 10.03.2025
tk
