Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

1. Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 3 only at this stage.

2. Mr.Manoj Bajaj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf.

3. Let three copies of the appeal be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the appeal shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, there is no need to issue notice to respondent Nos.4 & 5 as no order prejudicial to their interest is being passed, nor any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1 to 3 is needed at this stage. This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 9.1.2013 passed by learned Single Judge whereby criminal writ petition seeking release of the alleged detenues mentioned in para No.3 of the writ petition, through a writ of Habeas Corpus has been dismissed after observing that the dispute between the parties appears to be with regard to payment of wages.

4. 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 set-aside/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.

5. Ordered accordingly. Dasti.