https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285394 Non-fencing of fermentation vats under the Factories Act was treated as a continuing statutory breach because the duty to securely fence the vats persisted while the factory was worked, and each day's non-compliance constituted a fresh contravention punishable under the Act. The limitation period was held to run from the particular offence brought to the Inspector's knowledge, so Section 106 barred only contraventions outside the three-month period and did not prevent prosecution for later fresh defaults arising from continued omission. The complaint was therefore not time-barred, the acquittal on limitation was set aside, and the matter was remitted for trial. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jan 2020 10:26:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285394 Non-fencing of fermentation vats under the Factories Act was treated as a continuing statutory breach because the duty to securely fence the vats persisted while the factory was worked, and each day's non-compliance constituted a fresh contravention punishable under the Act. The limitation period was held to run from the particular offence brought to the Inspector's knowledge, so Section 106 barred only contraventions outside the three-month period and did not prevent prosecution for later fresh defaults arising from continued omission. The complaint was therefore not time-barred, the acquittal on limitation was set aside, and the matter was remitted for trial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 28 Feb 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285394