Adesh Kumar v. State Of Punjab And Others

2023:PHHC:126545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 26.09.2023 Adesh Kumar ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: None (Lawyers are abstaining from work).

***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) [1] The instant petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus to locate the detenues mentioned in para No.4 of the writ petition at the premises of the Brick Kiln of respondent No.5 or at any other place to be pointed out by the petitioner and get the detenues released forthwith from illegal detention by respondent Nos.5 to 7.

[2] Keeping in view that the lawyers are abstaining from work, advance notice upon the respondents is dispensed with. [3] In similar facts and circumstances, this Court vide judgment dated 14.09.2023 passed in CRWP91832023 titled



      

 , had disposed of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to treat this petition as a complaint under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and take immediate action in

- 2 - 2023:PHHC: 126545 accordance with law within a stipulated period, in view of decision of this Court in
 

  

Law Finder Doc Id #2066834 that has been followed in CRWP9626192022 titled   

  

, decided on 28.06.2022 and by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CRWP9878592023 titled       

 decided on 04.09.2023.

[4] A perusal of the decision of a Division Bench judgment of this Court in
   (supra), would further show that it held as under: "It may be mentioned here that the allegations of the appellant in the writ petition are that the alleged detenues mentioned in para No.3 of the writ petition who are working as labourers at the brick kiln of respondent Nos.4 & 5 are being kept as bonded labours. There can indeed be no doubt that if a labourer has been detained as bonded labour, it amounts to an offence under Sections 16 & 17 of the Bounded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976. We, however, clarify that the aforesaid observation does not mean that the allegations levelled by the appellant have been accepted.

Suffice it to observe that under the Act, the District Magistrate is under statutory obligation to hold a fact finding enquiry as and when a complaint alleging violation of the provisions of Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 is received. Since the appellant in the instant case has specifically averred that the persons mentioned in para No.3 of the writ petition have been detained as bonded labourers, we allow this appeal and setaside/modify the order dated 9.1.

2013 passed by the learned Single Judge to the extent that the petitioner's writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Sangrur, to treat this writ petition as a complaint under the 1976 Act and take immediate action in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order alongwith a copy of the writ petition."

- 3 - 2023:PHHC: 126545 [5] Thus, keeping in view the averments made in the petition and decision of Division Bench of this Court in
   (supra), the present Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2District Magistrate, Ludhiana, Punjab to treat this petition as a complaint under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and take immediate action in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. [6] A copy of this order be forwarded to the office of Advocate General, Punjab, to be sent to District Magistrate, Ludhiana, for ensuring requisite compliance.

(VIKAS SURI) September 26, 2023 JUDGE



 Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No