Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.T.ABDUL RASHEED versus E.S.I.CORPORATION

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.T.ABDUL RASHEED v. E.S.I.CORPORATION - Crl Rev Pet No. 242 of 1998 [2007] RD-KL 4530 (1 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 242 of 1998()

1. P.T.ABDUL RASHEED
... Petitioner

Vs

1. E.S.I.CORPORATION
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN

For Respondent :SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU

Dated :01/03/2007

O R D E R

K.R. UDAYABHANU, J


=================================
CRL. R.P. NO. 242 OF 1998
=================================

Dated this the 1st day of March 2007

O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 335/91 with respect to the offence under section 85(g) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. He stands convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The allegation is that the accused, said to be the principal employee of the establishment, did not furnish the details sought for by the Assistant Regional Director (Vigilance) of the E.S.I Corporation. The contention of the revision petitioner is that at the time the dispute, as to whether the establishment is covered by the ESI Act, was pending before the ESI Court and subsequently the ESI court as per Ext.P1 order has held that the establishment is not covered by the Act. The courts below have considered the evidence in the matter and found that the revision CRL. R.P. NO. 242 OF 1998 petitioner has failed to furnish the required documents and thereby violated section 44(2) of the Act. Considering the fact that the matter involves only appreciation of evidence, I find that no interference is called for. All the same, considering the plea of the counsel for the revision petitioner and also taking into consideration that the matter is of the year 1991, sentence is liable to be modified. Hence, the sentence is modified to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly.

K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.

CRL. R.P. NO. 242 OF 1998


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.