9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of period of limitation under Section 106 of the Factories Act for launching prosecutions for offences under the Act.
Analysis: 1. The main issue in this judgment is the interpretation of the period of limitation prescribed in Section 106 of the Factories Act for initiating prosecutions for offenses under the Act. The provision states that no court shall take cognizance of any offense under the Act unless a complaint is made within a specified timeframe from the date on which the alleged offense came to the knowledge of an Inspector. 2. The argument presented revolves around the calculation of the prescribed period of three months. The contention is whether the term "month" should be interpreted as a calendar month or 30 days. The judgment refers to legal precedents discussing the interpretation of the term "month" in different contexts and highlights the definition provided in the General Clauses Act, which defines "month" as a month reckoned according to the British calendar. 3. The judgment clarifies that in the context of the Factories Act, the term "three months" should be understood as three calendar months, as per the definition in the General Clauses Act. Despite the Act not explicitly defining the term "month," the court relies on the General Clauses Act to interpret the timeframe for filing complaints under Section 106. 4. Another aspect of the interpretation concerns the exclusion of the day of inspection, which is considered as the date of knowledge, from the calculation of the prescribed period. The judgment references the Limitation Act and legal principles to support the exclusion of the day of knowledge when computing the three-month period, ensuring that the prosecutions are considered within time. 5. The court's interpretation emphasizes that the term "within three months of the date" in Section 106 of the Factories Act means within three calendar months after the offense came to the knowledge of the Inspector. This interpretation, based on common law principles, the Limitation Act, and the General Clauses Act, results in the exclusion of the day of knowledge and the calculation of three calendar months for filing complaints. 6. Ultimately, the court dismisses the revisions, affirming that the prosecutions were initiated within the prescribed timeframe as per the interpretation provided in the judgment. The decision provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal provisions and precedents to clarify the period of limitation under the Factories Act for prosecuting offenses under the Act.
|
