Against the acquittal, appeals were filed in the High Court which were dismissed summarily on August 16, 1966.
In September 1962, Satpal the present accused and three others joined Tirath Ram as Partners.
Tirath Ram was then the sole proprietor of the companycern.
The facts disclosed in the case are as follows One Tirath Ram who was examined as P.W. 4 started a factory by the name of Net Ram Tirath Ram on November 9, 1957.
Tirath Ram went out of the business and the remaining partners companytinued running the factory jointly.
The factory was manufacturing in the years 1958 59 tavas, chaff cutter blades.
The firm, however, companytinued under the same name till February 13, 1963.
In April 1963, the factory was removed to other premises, a new electrical companynection was obtained but the old machinery of the factory save the electric motor was installed, and the factory companytinued, although number for the original business, but for the business of manufacturing iron nails for shoes for the bullocks.
This went on till April 30, 1963.
On that date, the old partnership was dissolved.
The prosecution ended in acquittal.
The factory was run in the same premises with the same labour and under the same name.
The firm did number at that time maintain a register of provident funds.
Later, the name of this manufacturing companycern was changed to Jai Bharat Metal Industries.
The present appeals have been filed by special leave against the judgments and orders of the High Court dismissing the appeals against the acquittals.
Hidayatullah, C.J. The State has appealed in these three appeals which will be governed by this judgment , against the acquittal of the respondent Satpal who was prosecuted along with a firm M s. Jai Bharat Metal Industries under Section 14 of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 read with Para 76 of the scheme framed under that Act for breach of Section 16 1 b of the Act.
