IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18288 of 2007 RAMAYAN TIWARY Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 6.5.2008. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the order of cognizance dated 22.12.2003 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in complaint case no. 627 of 2003 thereby cognizance under Section 29 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been taken against the petitioner. It appears from the record that the petitioner was Chairman of Magadh Gramin Bank whereas opposite party no. 8 was employee in the said bank. Opposite party no. 8 was terminated from the service thereafter he approached Industrial Tribunal. Industrial Tribunal vide its award dated 25.2.2005 directed the management of Magadh Gramin Bank for reinstatement of opposite party no. 8. However, award was not implemented. On the other hand, the petitioner moved to the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in writ which is still pending. In the meantime, opposite party no. 2, Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Gaya filed a complaint case against the petitioner under Section 29 of the Industrial Dispute Act for non-implementation of the award. Accordingly, cognizance has been taken against him. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the writ is still pending, the petitioner should not be prosecuted under Section 29 of the Act for non-implementation of the award. - 2 - On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that no stay has been granted by the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in the writ. Award has not been implemented and under the mandatory provision of Section 17(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act not even a penny has been paid to the opposite party no. 8. It is, further, submitted that there is no mandatory provision in the law that criminal proceeding cannot be initiated against the management on mere filing of writ against the award. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the submission of both the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that there is no merit in this application. Accordingly, the same is, hereby, rejected. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)