IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 12666 of 2005 BETWEEN: Neeraj Mishra, S/o. Devinath Mishra, HMT Bearing Ltd., Moula Ali, Hyderabad-500040, ... PETITIONER AND 1 Station House Officer, Malkajgiri Police Station, Hyderabad. 2 Enforcement Officer (Recovery), Employees Provident Fund Organization, A.P., Barkatpura, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the C.C.No.214/2004 on the file of the Court of the Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, East and North, R.R. District, L.B. Nagar as illegal, arbitrary, Un Constitutional, contrary to the provisions of Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 and consequently by quashing the same pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare C.C.No.214/2004 on the file of the Court of the Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, East and North, R.R. District, L.B. Nagar as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 (for short ‘the Act’). 2. Petitioner submits that for non-payment of the employees share under the provisions of the Act for the period from 02/2003 to 06/2004 to a tune of Rs.71,67,845/- a complaint has been filed by the second respondent before the first respondent, who in turn, filed FIR before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, East and North, which is numbered as C.C.No.214 of 2004. 3. The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to quash and set aside the aforesaid C.C and declare the same as illegal and arbitrary on the ground that the aforesaid mount has been paid subsequently. Whether the offence said to have been committed by the petitioner can be dispensed on payment of the due amount after prescribed period or not is a matter to be enquired in the pending criminal case. 4. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that once an amount due is not paid before the due date, penal provisions attract and therefore, it cannot be said that no offence is committed. Subsequent payment of the amount in installments has no bearing on the criminal proceedings. 5. I am of the opinion that the rival contentions cannot be appreciated with regard to the date of payment and the offence attracting penal provisions, as they are the matters to be decided after conducting enquiry and adducing necessary evidence. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief writ petition declaring the aforesaid case as illegal and arbitrary. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J May 1, 2008 DSK