IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2645 of 2009() ------------------------- IC.36/1999 of E.I. COURT, KOLLAM .................... ST.NO.828/99 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- SOMAN JACOB, KAVANAL, SREEKARYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PROPRIETOR, M/S.JACOB'S HOTEL, S.S.KOVIL STREET, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, MR.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ESI CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY MANAGER, LOCAL OFFICE, ESI CORPORATION, THRISSUR. R2 BY ADV. MR. T.V.AJAYAKUMAR, STANDING COUNSEL,ESI CORPORATION THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2645 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.828/1999 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 85(g) of Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Second respondent lodged the complaint alleging that petitioner defaulted to pay contributions payable under the Act and thereby committed the offence. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that under Anneuxre-II order, Employees Insurance Court, Kollam in I.C.No.36/1999, already declared that petitioner is not a covered establishment under the Act and therefore, petitioner is not liable to pay any contribution to the Corporation and hence prosecution of the petitioner for the offence under Section 85(g) of the Act is not sustainable and therefore, it is to be quashed. CRMC 2645/09 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and standing counsel for the second respondent were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent admitted that Annexure-II order has become final, though it is submitted that petitioner did not disclose the fact that the appeal filed against Annexure-II order was not dismissed on merits. But the fact that the establishment of the petitioner is not a covered establishment under the Act, in view of Annexure-II order is not disputed. If that be the case, even if petitioner is to be tried in S.T.No.828/1999, he cannot be convicted for the offence, as he is not liable to pay any contribution under the Act. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings is not in the interest of justice. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. S.T. No.828/1999 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed. 19th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv