Quashing of complaint refused where factory working-hours allegations disclosed an offence and justified continued investigation.

A complaint alleging breach of factory law requirements on working hours and maintenance of worker records was sufficient to justify investigation. The governing scheme required a notice of working hours for adult workers, a register of adult workers, and consistency between actual work, the displayed notice, and prior entries. At the quashing stage, the complaint had to be read as a whole, and the court would not conduct a detailed factual enquiry or test its genuineness. As the materials did not conclusively show that no offence was made out, the proceedings were not liable to be quashed and investigation was allowed to continue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint disclosed a cognizable offence so as to justify continuation of investigation and refuse quashing at the threshold.

Analysis: The complaint alleged violation of the statutory scheme governing factory working hours and maintenance of records. The governing provisions required a notice of working hours for adult workers, a register of adult workers, and conformity between actual work, the displayed notice, and the entries made beforehand. The complaint also referred to the relevant factory rules and forms, and the materials did not conclusively show absence of any offence. At the stage of quashing, the complaint had to be read as a whole, and the Court declined to test its genuineness or embark upon a detailed factual enquiry. The controlling principle was that investigation should not be stifled when the allegations disclose an offence, and interference is warranted only when no offence is made out.

Conclusion: The complaint disclosed a sufficient basis for investigation and the proceedings were not liable to be quashed.

---