- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2876 CRL.P No. 1511 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1511 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SRI. SUNDER RAJU, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O CHINNASWAMY RAJU, DIRECTOR OF M/S ATRIA CONVERGENCE, TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD., NO.1,2, & 3RD FLOOR, INDIAN EXPRESS BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA B.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE BY SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR, 49TH CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, DAIRY CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 029. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA.,HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 11.07.2017 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR CIRCLE-49 BEFOR THE MMTC-III COURT, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.5099/2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-L AND ALSO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.10.2017 OF THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE IN TAKING THE COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCE AND ORDERING SUMMONS ON THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.5099/2017 AS ANNEXURE-M. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2876 CRL.P No. 1511 of 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.1 in C.C.No.5099/2017 on the file of the learned III M.M.T.C. Court, Bengaluru, is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him on the basis of the complaint dated 11.07.2017 registered by - Senior Labour Inspector, Bengaluru. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the Senior Labour Inspector filed the complaint before the learned Magistrate against accused Nos.1 and 2 alleging that accused No.1 being the Director of the Company and accused No.2 being the Contractor engaged by accused No.1 has not produced relevant documents for having employed the labourers on contract basis, nor they have provided the wage details of the employees, thereby, violated Section 18 Rule 29(1) & 29(2) R/w Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences and registered C.C.No.5099/2017. Upon service of notice, the petitioner - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2876 CRL.P No. 1511 of 2018 being accused No.1 has approached this Court seeking to quash criminal proceeding initiated against him. 3. Heard Shri Manjunatha B., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt K P Yashodha, learned HCGP for respondent. Perused the materials on records. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" 5. My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 6. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per the complaint, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1, who is the Director of M/s Atria Convergence Technologies Pvt Ltd, which is a private limited Company. As per Section 22(1) of Minimum - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2876 CRL.P No. 1511 of 2018 Wages Act, 1948, the Company is responsible for the offence it has committed. But in the complaint, the Company is not made as a party, it is only the Director of the Company who is arrayed as accused No.1 and therefore, the complaint is bad under law. 7. Section 22C of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 refers to offence by the Company. If an offence is committed by the Company, every person who at the time the offence was committed, was in-charge of, and was responsible to, the Company for the conduct of the business of the Company, as well as the Company shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against. 8. It is the settled principle of law that only the Director of the Company cannot be made as a party, but the Company should have been one of the accused along with the person who is in-charge of and was responsible to conduct of business of the Company. Admittedly, the Labour Inspector has not made the Company as a party. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that a - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2876 CRL.P No. 1511 of 2018 criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. 9. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'Affirmative' and proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The Criminal proceedings in C.C.No.5099/2017 pending on the file of learned III M.M.T.C. Court, Bengaluru, on the basis of complaint dated 11.07.2017 registered by Senior Labour Inspector, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 18 rule 29(1) & 29(2) r/w Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948, is hereby quashed against the petitioner. SD/- (M G UMA) JUDGE ASN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23