Case Note & Summary
The appellant, C.K. Thapliyal, an Insurance Inspector of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, filed a complaint against respondents Manohar J. Nagpal, Smt. Kaushlya J. Nagpal, Prakash J. Nagpal, and M/s. Mona Plastics for failure to pay ESI contributions for their employees, an offence punishable under Section 85(a) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. The trial court, by order dated 22nd February 1999 in Case No. 185/ESIC/91, acquitted the respondents relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar, which permits acquittal if trial is not concluded within a specified period. The appellant appealed against this acquittal. The High Court noted that the appeal was more than 17 years old and decided to hear it on merits under Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellant's counsel argued that the delay in trial was not attributable to the respondents, and therefore the benefit of Raj Deo Sharma should not apply. The High Court agreed, observing that in similar appeals (Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 2000 and Appeal No. 800 of 2000), it had held that acquittal based on Raj Deo Sharma is not sustainable if the delay is not due to the accused. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh decision on merits, directing the trial court to expedite the hearing and decide the case within six months.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal - Delay in Trial - Section 85(a) Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - Section 386 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The trial court acquitted the respondents for non-payment of ESI contributions citing delay in trial based on Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar. However, the High Court found that the delay was not attributable to the respondents, and thus the acquittal could not be sustained. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of respondents under Section 85(a) of the ESI Act based on the ratio in Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar was justified when the delay in trial was not attributable to the accused.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 22nd February 1999 set aside. Matter remanded to trial court for fresh decision on merits. Trial court directed to expedite hearing and decide within six months.
Law Points
- Acquittal based on Raj Deo Sharma cannot be sustained if delay is not attributable to accused
- Section 386 CrPC allows appellate court to decide on merits
- Employer's failure to pay ESI contributions is punishable under Section 85(a) of ESI Act
