IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10781 of 1992 1. M/s Chaudhary Colour Company, At & P.O. Mahnar, P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali through Sri Sidharth Prasad Jaiswal. 2. Sri Sidharth Pd. Jaiswal. 3. Sri Ashok Kumar Jaiswal. 4. Sri Binod Kumar Jaiswal. 5. Sri Arun Kumar Jaiswal. 6. Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal. Petitioner No.2 to 6 are son of Late Sri Jaimangal Prasad Jaiswal, Residents of Vill. & P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali. ----- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri R. K. Kamati (E.O.) Inspector, Employees Provident Fund. ------ Respondents With Cr.Misc. No.10782 of 1992 1. M/s Chaudhary Colour Company, At & P.O. Mahnar, P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali through Sri Sidharth Prasad Jaiswal, partner. 2. Sri Sidharth Pd. Jaiswal. 3. Sri Ashok Kumar Jaiswal. 4. Sri Binod Kumar Jaiswal. 5. Sri Arun Kumar Jaiswal. 6. Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal. Petitioner No.2 to 6 are son of Late Sri Jaimangal Prasad Jaiswal, Residents of Vill. & P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali. ----- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri R. K. Kamati (E.O.) Inspector, Employees Provident Fund. ------ Respondents With Cr.Misc. No.10783 of 1992 1. M/s Chaudhary Colour Company, At & P.O. Mahnar, P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali through Sri Sidharth Prasad Jaiswal. 2. Sri Sidharth Pd. Jaiswal. 3. Sri Ashok Kumar Jaiswal. 4. Sri Binod Kumar Jaiswal. 5. Sri Arun Kumar Jaiswal. 6. Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal. Petitioner No.2 to 6 are son of Late Sri Jaimangal Prasad Jaiswal, Residents of Vill. & P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali. ----- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri R. K. Kamati (E.O.) Inspector, Employees Provident Fund. ------ Respondents With Cr.Misc. No.10784 of 1992 2 1. M/s Chaudhary Colour Company, At & P.O. Mahnar, P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali through Sri Sidharth Prasad Jaiswal. 2. Sri Sidharth Pd. Jaiswal. 3. Sri Ashok Kumar Jaiswal. 4. Sri Binod Kumar Jaiswal. 5. Sri Arun Kumar Jaiswal. 6. Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal. Petitioner No.2 to 6 are son of Late Sri Jaimangal Prasad Jaiswal, Residents of Vill. & P.S. Mahnar, District Vaishali. ----- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri R. K. Kamati (E.O.) Inspector, Employees Provident Fund. ------ Respondents ----------- 11 10.8.2009 Head counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, would bring to the notice of this Court an order dated 9th September, 1997 in Cr. Misc. No. 6090 of 1992 and its analogues cases filed by the same petitioners, namely, M/s Chaudhary Colour Company & Ors. wherein it has been held that the petitioner was not covered by the meaning of establishment under the Employees, Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. This Court, in fact, has gone to hold that- “This is because if the establishment was not covered under the Act, there was no question of determination of moneys due from the employers in course of the inquiry”. Having recorded so, this Court has also quashed the prosecution in 38 cases and 3 therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that these four cases, being absolutely identical to the aforementioned 38 cases, should also be quashed. Mr. R.S. Pradhan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, would submit that it is true that the aforesaid view has been taken by this court with regard to the same petitioners in respect of same allegation but then those cases were quashed at the very inception on 9th of September, 1997 whereas these four cases have remained pending due to laches on the part of the petitioners. Considering the fact that all the four cases in hand are absolutely identical, there should be no different result and accordingly, if the petitioners have delayed either in approaching this Court or getting the matter adjudicated to some extent, it is they who have also suffered in course of protracted litigation. Be that as it may, as all these four ceases are squarely covered by the ratio of the order of this Court dated 9th September, 4 1997 in the earlier cases of petitioners, they are also allowed in same terms and consequently the prosecution of the petitioners in all the four cases are also hereby quashed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)