AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This revision is filed against the order passed in Crl.A.S.R. No.3157/97 on the file of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
The petitioner/accused was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 85(a), 85(e) and 85(g) of Employees State Insurance Act. He was found guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable u/s 85(a), and Rs.500/- each for the offences punishable u/s 85(e) and 85(g) of the Act. The petitioner/accused preferred appeal before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge. The office took objection that appeal lies to High Court u/s 82 of Employees State Insurance Act and returned the appeal.
The order is challenged in this Revision.
The learned Counsel appearing for respondents fairly submitted that if any order is passed u/s 85 of the Act, certainly appeal lies to the High Court u/s 82 on substantial question of law as envisaged u/s 82 of the Act itself. If any order is passed under any other provision, like the one in the instant case i.e., under Sections 85(a), 85(e) and 85(g), appeal certainly lies to Sessions Court. Wherever, there is no E.S.I. Court, the cases are filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate. On the judgments of such Magistrates, appeals are preferred to Sessions Court. On the same analogy, if any order is passed under any other provision except u/s 75 of the Act, appeal shall lie to the Sessions Court, u/s 374 Cr.PC.
I have also examined the provision of law. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents is well founded. Therefore, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge is directed to entertain the appeal and decide the same according to law.