2013 (3) ABR 751 ::(2013) 3 BomCR(Cri) 420 ::(2013) 3 Mh LJ (Cri) 75 ::2013 AllMR(CRI) 1819

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. C. Dharmadhikri , J

( A ) Constitution of India Art. 226 — Criminal P. C. (2 of 1974), S. 482 — Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act (58 of 1981), Ss. 16, 4, 3 — Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme (2002), Cls. 25, 42 — Failure to engage guards allotted by Board — Offence of — Quashing of complaint — Accused were registered with Board as principal employer — As per the Clause 25(2) of Sc-heme (2002) every registered principal employer was under obligation to engage registered security guards of Board — Act (1981) being a welfare piece of legislation meant to protect security guards from exploitation, complaint cannot be quashed unless Court is satisfied that complaint does not disclose any offence — Complaint alleging specific violation of scheme — Cannot be quashed.The aim and object of the Act (1981) is to ensure welfare of security guards hence framing of the Scheme is necessary to fulfil it. The Scheme ensures that the intent of the Legislature is implemented. If the Security Guards are guaranteed protection from exploitation and also employment, then, naturally there are obligations and duties which have to be fulfilled by the Principal Employer. If they fail to do so, then, they have to proceed against as such failure on their part is made a punishable offence. The Act being a welfare piece of legislation meant to make the service conditions of the security guards ....