- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11329 WP No. 8058 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 8058 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA S/O LANKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCCUPIER, M/S INCAP CONTRACT MANUFACTURING SERVICES PVT. LTD. SY.NO.36-39, PANDITHANAHALLI, HIREHALLI POST, TUMKUR 572 168 2. VENKATESH T K S/O T.V.KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, MANAGER, M/S INCAP CONTRACT MANUFACTURING SERVICES PVT. LTD. SY. NO.36-39, PANDITHANAHALLI, HIREHALLI POST, TUMKUR 572 168 3. M/S INCAP CONTRACT MANUFACTURING SERVICES PVT. LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, HAVING ITS FACTORY AT SY. NO. 36-39, PANDITHANAHALLI, HIREHALLI POST, TUMKUR -572 168 REP BY AGM …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K S PONNAPPA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11329 WP No. 8058 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SRI KRISHNAPPA K.S., DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FACTORIES, TUMKUR DIVISION (INSPECTOR APPOINTED UNDER SECTION 8(1) OF THE FACTORIES ACT, 1948), CHIRADEEP, 1ST FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, ASHOKNAGAR, TUMKUR 572103. 2. VISHWANATHA K S/O NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, SENIOR EXECUTIVE QUALITY ASSURANCE, M/S INCAP CONTRACT MANUFACTURING SERVICES PVT. LTD. SY. NO. 36-39, PANDITHANAHALLI, HIREHALLI POST, TUMKUR 572 168. PRESENTLY R/A 8TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS, BEHIND TGMC BANK, ASHOKNAGAR, TUMKUR -572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M V ANOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. CHIDANAND M, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 05.09.2024 AND THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO. 8274/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, TUMKUR (ANNEXURE-A) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENSE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 92 OF THE FACTORIES ACT, 1948 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11329 WP No. 8058 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners challenge the cognizance taken of the offence punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948. The 1st respondent filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging that an incident had occurred on 17.04.2023 in which the 2nd respondent had sustained some injuries while he was working as a Senior Executive Quality Assurance with the petitioner No.3- Factory. It is alleged that the alleged incident occurred due to the lapse on the part of the petitioners who are the occupiers of the factory premises. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 issued a detailed accident investigation report cum show cause notice dated 31.05.2023 to the petitioners asserting that action should be initiated against them for contravening the provisions of Karnataka Factories Act, 1948 and Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969. The petitioners replied to the show cause notice appropriately. However, no order was passed on the reply. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11329 WP No. 8058 of 2025 4. This Court in Crl.P. No.103868/2024 : DD 24.02.2025, in similar circumstances, held as under: “7. In similar circumstances, a coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.2570/2021, along with connected petitions, ruled that although there is no express provision in the Karnataka Factories Act, 1948 or the Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969 that mandates the concerned authority to pass an order on the reply submitted by the occupier or factory manager, the principles of natural justice require that such an order be passed. Otherwise, the right granted to the occupier or factory manager to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the Factories Act becomes redundant. 8. Therefore, it was incumbent upon the authority to consider and pass an appropriate order to enable the petitioners to file an appeal under Section 107 of the Factories Act. In light of the foregoing discussion, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law”. 5. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 05.09.2024 in C.C. No. 8274/2024 on the file of V Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tumkur is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43