S.M. DATTA versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 140 · Decided: 24-08-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AJAY PRAKASH MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
S.M. DATTA 
V. 
STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. 
AUGUST 24, 2001 
B 
[A.P. MISRA AND UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.] 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-S.482-Criminal Proceedings-
Quashing of at the investigation stagec-Held, ought not to be quashed unless 
C there is abuse of the process of law-Quashing of a complaint should rather 
be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule. 
Labour Law: 
Factories Act, 1948/Gujarat Factory Rules, 1963-Sections 61, 62 and 
D 63/Rules 87 and I JO-Requirement of Form 14 and 28-Jnspection of 
Factory-Adult worker found working beyond prescribed working hours without 
his name being displayed in notice Form 14-Provisions of Sections 61 and 
62 requiring notice of period of work and maintenance of Register-Non-
compliance of-Criminal complaint against the occupier of the Factory-
Revision Petition for quashing the criminal complaint-Dismissed by High 
E Court-Held, it would neither be fair nor reasonable at investigation stage to 
nu/life the efforts of Factories inspector under the Rules-Matter needs further 
inquiry and investigation-Thus, High Court was justified in not quashing the 
criminal complaint at the initial stage. 
F 
Complainant-Factories Inspector, on inspection of a Factory found that 
an adult worker in Group 'C' working after the prescribed working hours 
without his name appearing in the attendance register and in the Notice Form 
No. 14 displayed in the Factory. Consequently, a criminal complaint for 
violation of Section 63 of the Factories Act, 1948 was filed against the 
"Occupier" of the Factory before the Magistrate. Appellant, Vice Chairman 
G of the Company and "Occupier" of the Factory, filed a Criminal Revision 
Petition before the High Court for quashing the complaint at the investigation 
H 
stage, which was dismissed. Hence these appeals. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD : I.I. The criminal complaints ought not to be quashed at the 
140 
S.M. DATTA v. STATE OF GUJARAT 
141 
initial stages unless it is termed to be an abuse of the process of the Court. In A 
the instant case, the complaint in q_uestion cannot be so termed as such and 
thus there is no justification for interference with the order passed by the High 
Court. [155-G] 
1.2. Criminal proceedings, in the normal course of events ought not to 
be scuttled at the initial stage, unless the same amounts to an abuse of the B 
process of law. In the normal course of events thus, quashing of a complaint 
should rather be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule. The 
genuineness of the averments in the FIR cannot possibly be gone into and 
the document shall have to be read as a whole so as to decipher the intent of 
the maker thereof. It is not a document which require decision with exactitude C 
neither it is a document which requires mathematical accuracy and nicety, 
but the same should be able to communicate or indicative of disclosure of an 
offence broadly and in the event the said test stands satisfied, the question 
relating to the quashing of a complaint would not arise. There cannot possibly 
be any guiding factor as to which investigation ought to be scuttled at the 
initial stages and investigations wh kh ought not to be so scuttled. The First D 
Information Report needs to be considered in the event of commission of a 
cognizable offence if an offence stands disclosed in the First Information 
Report, interest of justice requires further investigation by the Investigating 
Agency. Investigation of an offence is within the exclusive domain of the police 
department and not the law courts. In the event of disclosure of an offence, it E 
is a duty incumbent to investigate into offence and bring the offender 'to books 
in order to serve the cause of justice and it is only thereafter the Investigating 
Officer submits the report to the Court with a prayer to take cognizance of 
the offence under Section 190 Cr.P.C. and it is on submission of the report 
that the duty of the police ends, subject however to the provisions as contained 
in Section 173(8) of the Code. There is thus a clear and well defined area of F 
operation and demarcated function in the field of investigation of crimes and 
its subsequent adjudication. While an offence if disclosed in the Fm ought 
not to be thwarted at the initial stages, but in the event, however, the materials 
do not disclose an offence, no investigation should normally be permitted. 
(147-E-F, 144-E-FJ G 
King Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmed, (1944) 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.