OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-7600-2024 Date of Decision: August 07 v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed of with a direction to the District
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 ss. 16, 17
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. A Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 32 of 2013, titled 'Murti versus The State of Punjab and others', has held as under: It may be mentioned here that the allegations of the appellant in the writ petition are that the alleged…
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr.Amandeep Singh Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. ........ RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL)
This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus for releasing detenues mentioned in para No. 4 of the petition, who are illegally detained by respondent No.4 and his accomplices and appoint a warrant Officer to locate the detenues. It is further prayed that respondent No.4 and his accomplices be also punished under the provisions of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 (for brevity,`the Act’), the petitioner and detenues be rehabilitated as provided in the Act.
Notice of motion to the official respondents only. On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, has accepted notice on behalf of official respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has restricted his prayer to MEENU 2024.08.07 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the extent that the present petition be disposed of with a direction to CRWP-7600-2024 -2- respondent No. 2 to treat this petition as a complaint under the Act and take immediate action in accordance with law within a stipulated period.
Operative part
A Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 32 of 2013, titled 'Murti versus The State of Punjab and others', has held as under:
It may be mentioned here that the allegations of the appellant in the writ petition are that the alleged detenues mentioned in para No.3 of the writ petition who are working as labourers at the brick kiln of respondent Nos. 4 & 5 are being kept as bonded labours. There can indeed be no doubt that if a labourer has been detained as bonded labour, it amounts to an offence under Sections 16 & 17 of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976. We, however, clarify that the aforesaid observation does not mean that the allegations levelled by the appellant have been accepted. Suffice it to observe that under the Act, the District Magistrate is under statutory obligation to hold a fact finding enquiry as and when a complaint alleging violation of the provisions of Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 is received. Since the appellant in the instant case has specifically averred that the persons mentioned in para No.3 of the writ petition have been detained as bonded labourers, we allow this appeal and setaside/modify the order dated 9.1.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge to the extent that the petitioner's writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Sangrur, to treat this writ petition as a complaint under the 1976 Act and take immediate action in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order alongwith a copy of the writ petition.
Accordingly, this Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of with a
direction to District Magistrate, Jalandhar, to treat this petition as a complaint under the Act and take immediate action in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. August 07, 2024 meenuss 1. Whether speaking/reasoned ? 2. Whether reportable ? ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MEENU 2024.08.07 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed of with a direction to the District
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 — ss. 16, 17.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 07 Aug 2024. The bench was RAJESH BHARDWA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.