Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri A M Samiulla, owned a tailor shop named 'Gents Select Tailors' in Gandhinagar, Bangalore. On 27 January 2006, the Senior Labour Inspector along with other officers inspected the shop at 12:45 noon and found two child labourers, Master Anand Raj (aged 12 years) and Master Narendra (aged 13 years), working as helpers. The petitioner could not produce any age proof for the children. A doctor examined the children on the spot and opined that they were below 14 years of age. Consequently, a complaint was lodged, and the petitioner was tried for offences under Section 4(1) Rule 3, Sections 6-A, 12(1) and Rule 24A of the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961 and Rules 1963. The trial court convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to pay fines totaling Rs. 18,250 with default clauses. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence. The petitioner then filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC before the High Court. The High Court noted that the petitioner's counsel was absent and appointed an amicus curiae. After hearing the amicus curiae and the state counsel, the court found no merit in the revision petition. The court observed that the factual findings of the trial and appellate courts were concurrent and that the petitioner had failed to show any illegality or perversity. The court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Child Labour - Employment of Children - Prohibition - Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961, Sections 4(1), 6-A, 12(1), Rule 3, Rule 24A - The petitioner was convicted for employing two children aged 12 and 13 years as helpers in his tailor shop without maintaining age proof. The court upheld the conviction, holding that the employer is responsible for ensuring compliance with child labour laws and that the medical opinion on age was sufficient evidence. (Paras 1-4)
B) Criminal Procedure - Revision - Scope - Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC - The High Court in revision declined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the trial and appellate courts, as no illegality or perversity was shown. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction and sentence of the petitioner for employing child labour under the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961 is sustainable.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition, upholding the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.
Law Points
- Child labour prohibition
- Employer's duty to maintain age proof
- Burden of proof on employer
- Sentencing discretion in revision
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (11) 30
Criminal Revision Petition No. 220 of 2011
M S Aswatha Reddy (for petitioner, absent), G M Ananda (Amicus Curiae), Thejesh P (HCGP for respondent)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition against conviction for employing child labour.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the appellate court's order dated 04.11.2010 and the trial court's order dated 03.07.2010.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was convicted for employing two child labourers in his tailor shop without maintaining age proof.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to fines; appellate court dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction.
Issues
Whether the conviction for employing child labour under the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel was absent; amicus curiae argued on behalf of petitioner.
Respondent argued that the conviction was based on evidence and concurrent findings.
Ratio Decidendi
The employer is responsible for ensuring compliance with child labour laws and must maintain age proof of employees. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts cannot be interfered with in revision unless there is illegality or perversity.
Judgment Excerpts
This petition is directed against the judgment dated 04.11.2010 passed by the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.535/2010 dismissing the appeal by confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in C.C.No.1272/2006 convicting the accused – petitioner herein for the offence under Section 4(1) Rule 3, and Sections 6-A, 12(1) and Rule 24A of the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961 and Rules 1963.
The respondent – complainant who was the Senior Labour Inspector had lodged a complaint against the petitioner – accused alleging that when he along with other officers had inspected the ‘Gents Select Tailors’ Shop’ at Hotel Brindavan Building, Gandhinagar owned by the petitioner, as on 27.01.2006 at 12.45 noon, they found that two child labourers namely Master Anand Raj, aged 12 years and Master Narendra, aged 13 years were employed by the petitioner in the said Tailor shop.
Procedural History
The trial court convicted the petitioner on 03.07.2010 in C.C.No.1272/2006. The appellate court dismissed the appeal on 04.11.2010 in Crl.A.No.535/2010. The petitioner filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC before the High Court, which was dismissed on 13.11.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961: 4(1), 6-A, 12(1), 24
- Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Rules, 1963: 3, 24-A
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 397, 401
