Banwarilal Agarwalla v. The State of Bihar 1961 AIR 849

BANWARILAL AGARWALLA v. THE STATE OF BIHAR

Whether Section 76 of the Mines Act, 1952, which allows for the prosecution of shareholders and directors of a private company owning a mine, violates Article 14 of the Constitution?
Whether regulations framed without adherence to mandatory procedural safeguards, such as consultation with prescribed authorities, can be deemed valid?

A statutory provision ensuring equal liability among individuals similarly situated does not violate the principle of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution, provided it serves a legitimate objective and avoids arbitrary discrimination.
Compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards is a prerequisite for the validity of regulations. Non-adherence renders the regulations invalid unless a specific exception is provided by the legislature.

On February 20, 1958, a tragic accident occurred at the Central Bhowra Colliery in Dhanbad, Bihar, which resulted in the deaths of 23 workers. An inquiry under Section 24 of the Mines Act, 1952, was conducted to investigate the causes of the accident.
Based on the findings of the inquiry, a complaint was filed by the Regional Inspector of Mines, Dhanbad, against Banwarilal Agarwalla, who was a shareholder and director of the private company owning the colliery. The charges included violations under Section 74 of the Mines Act for contravention of Regulations 107 and 127 of the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhanbad, took cognizance of the complaint, and criminal processes were issued against Agarwalla, who was subsequently summoned to face prosecution.
Agarwalla filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against him.
The Patna High Court dismissed the writ petition summarily, upholding the continuation of the criminal proceedings against Agarwalla.
Agarwalla then approached the Supreme Court, seeking special leave to appeal against the Patna High Court’s order.
The Supreme Court granted special leave to appeal and examined the constitutionality of Section 76 and the legality of the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957, with regard to the mandatory consultation requirement under Section 59(3) of the Mines Act, 1952.

The Supreme Court held that Section 76 of the Mines Act, 1952, which allows for the prosecution of shareholders or directors of a private mining company, did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
The term “any one” was interpreted to mean “every one,” making all shareholders and directors liable to prosecution. This provision was intended to ensure accountability without discrimination, applying equally to all involved in the ownership and management of the mine.
The Court also held that the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957, were invalid because they were framed without consultation with the Mining Board, as required under Section 59(3) of the Mines Act, 1952.
The consultation with the Mining Board under the 1952 Act was mandatory, and the absence of such consultation rendered the regulations invalid.
The issue of whether consultation with the Mining Boards under the 1923 Act could suffice was left for the lower court to determine.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to assess whether the mandatory consultation took place. If the consultation was found to be absent, the regulations would be invalid, and Agarwalla would be entitled to acquittal. Otherwise, the case should proceed accordingly.