High Court · 2025
Case Details
Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 25.03.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023andCrl.M.P.Nos.14137 and 14138 of 2023T.Ganesan ... PetitionerVsState represented byDeputy Director of Industrial Safety and Health,Tiruvottiyur,Chennai – 600 019. ... RespondentCriminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.233 of 2023 now pending trial on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur and quash the proceedings by the respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Harooa for M/s.Agam legal For Respondent: Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023O R D E RThis petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.233 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Managing Director of Panasonic Appliances India Company Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company' for short), and the petitioner is nominated as Occupier of the factory. The Company is registered under the Factories Act, 1948. On 10.08.2022, the respondent conducted an inspection and found that the Company failed to provide a full-time factory Medical Officer. Therefore, the Company was served with a show cause notice and even on receipt of a reply, the respondent was not satisfied. After obtaining sanction, the respondent filed a complaint against the Company for the contravention of Section 2(cb) Schedule I Item No.16, Section 41C Rule 62-O (1) (c) (i) (iii) read with Section 112 of the Factories Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950. This offence is punishable under Section 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 202396-A of the Factories Act. The Company is engaged in the manufacture of domestic appliances such as Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's Company is in the process of manufacturing Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. Therefore, it is not coming under the list of industries involving hazardous processes, in order to attract the violation of Section 2(cb). Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable and liable to be quashed.4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's Company has violated the provision under Section 2(cb), since the petitioner's Company is coming under Schedule - I, Item No.16, which pertains to electroplating industries. The Company is involved in the manufacturing of Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. Therefore, it is also having electroplating. Hence, the petitioner's Company is very well coming under 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023the definition of Section 2(cb), and as such, the petitioner ought to have provided a full-time Medical Officer.5. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. This issue already dealt with by the Madurai Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P (MD) No.16416 of 2023 dated 05.09.2024 and the relevant portions are extracted hereunder:-“6. There is no quarrel over the proposition that Section 41 (B) of the Act, is applicable only in respect of factories involving hazardous process and that the hazardous process is defined under Section 2(cb). The only point of debate is that whether the petitioner's industry, to which, the Rules, namely, the Highly Flammable Liquids and Flammable Compressed Gases Rules as contained in Schedule 31 under Rule 95 of the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950, shall be automatically deemed to be a industry involving hazardous process or an industry which is an industry concerning highly flammable liquids and gases. 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 20237. As a matter of fact, Rule 95 is framed with reference to Section 87 of the Factories Act. Section 87 of the Factories Act relates to dangerous operations. As per the same, if the State Government is of the opinion that any manufacturing process or operation carried on in any factory exposes any persons employed it to a serious risk of bodily injury, poisoning or disease, it may frame Rules applicable to any factory or class or description of factories, in which, the manufacturing process is carried on, specifying the things which are enumerated under Sub-Section A to F of the said Act. It is not the case of the complainant that the petitioner/ accused herein had violated any Rules framed by the State Government under Section 87. Rule 95 and the above Rule mentioned with reference to the inflammable gases are framed under Section 87 only. If there is violation of Rule 87, then, it would be a separate cause of action to file a complaint in that regard. The instant case is one complaining violation of Section 41 (B) with reference to factories employing hazardous processes. The same is defined under Section 2(cb). 8. Section 2 (cb) is extracted hereunder for ready reference: “(cb) “hazardous process” means any process 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023or activity in relation to an industry specified in the First Schedule where, unless special care is taken, raw materials used therein or the intermediate or finished products, bye-products, wastes or effluents thereof would - (i) cause material impairment to the health of the persons engaged in or connected therewith, or (ii) result in the pollution or the general environment: Provided that the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the First Schedule by way of addition, omission or variation of any industry specified in the said Schedule.” 9. It can be seen that the heading to the 1st Schedule clearly reads as the list of industries involving hazardous process and the heading is also extracted hereunder: “THE FIRST SCHEDULE LIST OF INDUSTRIES INVOLVING HAZARDOUS PROCESSES 1. Ferrous Metallurgical industries —Integrated Iron and Steel —Ferrow-alloys —Special Steels .... ......... 29. Highly Inflammable Liquids and Gases” 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 202310. It is only the types of industries which are enumerated. Therefore, Entry 29 should be read as the industry which concerns highly flammable liquids and gases and not every other industry which may use a gas cylinder, for a different process. Therefore, unless the process of making synthetic yarn/synthetic cord is specifically enumerated in the 1st Schedule, it cannot be said that the same would be an industry which is enumerated in the 1st Schedule. 29 categories of industries have been enumerated in the 1st Schedule, in which, the category of the petitioner's industry does not find a place.11. Further, it can be seen that Section 2 (cb) also specifies, viz., the hazardous process means any process or activity in relation to an industry which is specified in the 1st Schedule and unless special care is taken, the raw materials used therein, or intermediate or finished products or by products, waste or influence thereof, would cause material impairment to the health of the persons engaged or connected therewith, or result in the pollution of the general environment. The raw material or the intermediate material or the finished product or any by product or waste or effluent is not mentioned in the complaint. As a matter of 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023fact, the gas cylinder which is used, would not come within the purview on the face of Section 2 (cb). 12. It is another thing that if the use of the gas cylinder would amount to a dangerous operation, then Rules can be framed under Section 87 imposing any condition and if that is violated, then the persons can be prosecuted....”7. In the case on hand, the respondent filed a complaint for the violation of Section 2(cb) Schedule I Item No.16, Section 41C Rule 62-O (1) (c) (i) (iii) read with Section 112 of the Factories Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950. The petitioner's Company cannot be termed as a factory utilizing hazardous process. Therefore, the violation, as alleged by the respondent, is not at all applicable to the petitioner's Company.8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 20238. In view of the above, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the proceeding in C.C.No.233 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.25.03.2025Index:Yes/NoNeutral Citation/Yes/NokvTo1. The Deputy Director of Industrial Safety and Health, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai – 600 019.2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.kvCrl.O.P.No.20709 of 202325.03.202510/10
Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 25.03.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023andCrl.M.P.Nos.14137 and 14138 of 2023T.Ganesan ... PetitionerVsState represented byDeputy Director of Industrial Safety and Health,Tiruvottiyur,Chennai – 600 019. ... RespondentCriminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.233 of 2023 now pending trial on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur and quash the proceedings by the respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Harooa for M/s.Agam legal For Respondent: Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023O R D E RThis petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.233 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Managing Director of Panasonic Appliances India Company Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company' for short), and the petitioner is nominated as Occupier of the factory. The Company is registered under the Factories Act, 1948. On 10.08.2022, the respondent conducted an inspection and found that the Company failed to provide a full-time factory Medical Officer. Therefore, the Company was served with a show cause notice and even on receipt of a reply, the respondent was not satisfied. After obtaining sanction, the respondent filed a complaint against the Company for the contravention of Section 2(cb) Schedule I Item No.16, Section 41C Rule 62-O (1) (c) (i) (iii) read with Section 112 of the Factories Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950. This offence is punishable under Section 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 202396-A of the Factories Act. The Company is engaged in the manufacture of domestic appliances such as Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's Company is in the process of manufacturing Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. Therefore, it is not coming under the list of industries involving hazardous processes, in order to attract the violation of Section 2(cb). Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable and liable to be quashed.4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's Company has violated the provision under Section 2(cb), since the petitioner's Company is coming under Schedule - I, Item No.16, which pertains to electroplating industries. The Company is involved in the manufacturing of Electric Rice Cookers, Mixer Grinders, and Wet Grinders. Therefore, it is also having electroplating. Hence, the petitioner's Company is very well coming under 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023the definition of Section 2(cb), and as such, the petitioner ought to have provided a full-time Medical Officer.5. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. This issue already dealt with by the Madurai Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P (MD) No.16416 of 2023 dated 05.09.2024 and the relevant portions are extracted hereunder:-“6. There is no quarrel over the proposition that Section 41 (B) of the Act, is applicable only in respect of factories involving hazardous process and that the hazardous process is defined under Section 2(cb). The only point of debate is that whether the petitioner's industry, to which, the Rules, namely, the Highly Flammable Liquids and Flammable Compressed Gases Rules as contained in Schedule 31 under Rule 95 of the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950, shall be automatically deemed to be a industry involving hazardous process or an industry which is an industry concerning highly flammable liquids and gases. 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 20237. As a matter of fact, Rule 95 is framed with reference to Section 87 of the Factories Act. Section 87 of the Factories Act relates to dangerous operations. As per the same, if the State Government is of the opinion that any manufacturing process or operation carried on in any factory exposes any persons employed it to a serious risk of bodily injury, poisoning or disease, it may frame Rules applicable to any factory or class or description of factories, in which, the manufacturing process is carried on, specifying the things which are enumerated under Sub-Section A to F of the said Act. It is not the case of the complainant that the petitioner/ accused herein had violated any Rules framed by the State Government under Section 87. Rule 95 and the above Rule mentioned with reference to the inflammable gases are framed under Section 87 only. If there is violation of Rule 87, then, it would be a separate cause of action to file a complaint in that regard. The instant case is one complaining violation of Section 41 (B) with reference to factories employing hazardous processes. The same is defined under Section 2(cb). 8. Section 2 (cb) is extracted hereunder for ready reference: “(cb) “hazardous process” means any process 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023or activity in relation to an industry specified in the First Schedule where, unless special care is taken, raw materials used therein or the intermediate or finished products, bye-products, wastes or effluents thereof would - (i) cause material impairment to the health of the persons engaged in or connected therewith, or (ii) result in the pollution or the general environment: Provided that the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the First Schedule by way of addition, omission or variation of any industry specified in the said Schedule.” 9. It can be seen that the heading to the 1st Schedule clearly reads as the list of industries involving hazardous process and the heading is also extracted hereunder: “THE FIRST SCHEDULE LIST OF INDUSTRIES INVOLVING HAZARDOUS PROCESSES 1. Ferrous Metallurgical industries —Integrated Iron and Steel —Ferrow-alloys —Special Steels .... ......... 29. Highly Inflammable Liquids and Gases” 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 202310. It is only the types of industries which are enumerated. Therefore, Entry 29 should be read as the industry which concerns highly flammable liquids and gases and not every other industry which may use a gas cylinder, for a different process. Therefore, unless the process of making synthetic yarn/synthetic cord is specifically enumerated in the 1st Schedule, it cannot be said that the same would be an industry which is enumerated in the 1st Schedule. 29 categories of industries have been enumerated in the 1st Schedule, in which, the category of the petitioner's industry does not find a place.11. Further, it can be seen that Section 2 (cb) also specifies, viz., the hazardous process means any process or activity in relation to an industry which is specified in the 1st Schedule and unless special care is taken, the raw materials used therein, or intermediate or finished products or by products, waste or influence thereof, would cause material impairment to the health of the persons engaged or connected therewith, or result in the pollution of the general environment. The raw material or the intermediate material or the finished product or any by product or waste or effluent is not mentioned in the complaint. As a matter of 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023fact, the gas cylinder which is used, would not come within the purview on the face of Section 2 (cb). 12. It is another thing that if the use of the gas cylinder would amount to a dangerous operation, then Rules can be framed under Section 87 imposing any condition and if that is violated, then the persons can be prosecuted....”7. In the case on hand, the respondent filed a complaint for the violation of Section 2(cb) Schedule I Item No.16, Section 41C Rule 62-O (1) (c) (i) (iii) read with Section 112 of the Factories Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules, 1950. The petitioner's Company cannot be termed as a factory utilizing hazardous process. Therefore, the violation, as alleged by the respondent, is not at all applicable to the petitioner's Company.8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 20238. In view of the above, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the proceeding in C.C.No.233 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.25.03.2025Index:Yes/NoNeutral Citation/Yes/NokvTo1. The Deputy Director of Industrial Safety and Health, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai – 600 019.2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20709 of 2023G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.kvCrl.O.P.No.20709 of 202325.03.202510/10