1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD, APPELLATE SIDE, CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 796 OF 2002 Shri Gulabrao S/o Sakharam Shelke, Age: 58 years, Occu.: Solicitor, R/o Ameya Apartment, 7th Floor, New Prabhadevi Road, Behind Mamata Apartment, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-25. ... PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra. [Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court, of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad]. 2. The Police Sub Inspector, Parner Police Station, Parner, Taluka: Parner, District: Ahmednagar. ... RESPONDENTS. *** Mr. R. N. Dhorde, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. B. R. Khekale, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** CORAM: K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED: 28th AUGUST, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard both the counsel. The Petitioner was a Chairman of the Sugar Factor at the material time in the 2 year 2000. By virtue of provisions of section 73-A of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1970 he resigned on 10th May, 2000. The copy of resignation letter is on record. In the election held at the behest of Karkhana, in presence of Collector, another body came to be elected and naturally the present Applicant ceased to be the Chairman. Action under section 7 (A) of Provident Fund Act was initiated in relation to the period January, 1997 to February, 2001 and notices were issued on 25th January, 2002 to four persons. However, such notice was not issued to the present accused/ applicant. The petitioner having ceased to be the Chairman from 11th May, 2000, he prima facie was not liable to meet the demand notice, indeed which was issued to other four persons. 2. In terms of section 36 of the Act the management of the factory is governed by a well organised system wherein the powers are bestowed to the Managing Director. The pay sheet of salary and wages of the employees are prepared by the concerned officers and the Managing Director has to sign and rectify it wherever it is so desired. The statutory deductions and other deductions consequently will have to be under the supervision, guidance of the Managing 3 Director. Even otherwise, the role of the present accused applicant as a Chairman would not have come into play at the material time when the so called dues of the Provident Fund remained accumulated. 3. The prosecution is for an offence under section 406 of Indian Penal Code read with section 34 IPC. It naturally could not have been initiated against the accused/ applicant, he being not a direct employer of the employees. The prosecution looses its significance and apparently is abuse of the powers in the authority. Consequently, Crime No.I-73 of 2002, registered with Parner Police Station on 16th April, 2002 for an offence under section 406 I.P.C. is quashed and set aside. Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of. Dated:28th August, 2009. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] ans/796