Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr.

Decided On : Nov-22-1994

Court : Orissa

Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]
Code Context


$shops2 = $shops['topics'];
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr. Semantic Analysis',
	'shops' => array(
		'LAW' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 1 => 'Section 482',
			(int) 2 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 3 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 4 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 5 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 6 => 'Section 2(d',
			(int) 7 => 'Constitution',
			(int) 8 => 'Article 23(1',
			(int) 9 => 'Constitution',
			(int) 10 => 'Article 23(1',
			(int) 11 => 'Section 2(g',
			(int) 12 => 'Section 4 of the Act',
			(int) 13 => 'Section 16',
			(int) 14 => 'Section 17'
		),
		'ORG' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'ORDERA',
			(int) 1 => 'Sub-Divisional Magistrate',
			(int) 2 => 'Additional Sessions',
			(int) 3 => 'the Welfare Extension Officer',
			(int) 4 => 'Court',
			(int) 5 => 'S.D.M.',
			(int) 6 => 'the Revisional Fourm',
			(int) 7 => 'State',
			(int) 8 => 'Labour System',
			(int) 9 => 'Section 374 Indian Penal Code',
			(int) 10 => 'IPC'
		),
		'PERSON' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Pasayat',
			(int) 1 => 'Jaypore',
			(int) 2 => 'Khurda',
			(int) 3 => 'Narayan Mohanty',
			(int) 4 => 'Padam Talia',
			(int) 5 => 'Labourer Scheme',
			(int) 6 => 'Articles 23(1',
			(int) 7 => 'Bailey',
			(int) 8 => 'Alabana',
			(int) 9 => 'IPC',
			(int) 10 => 'Jaypore'
		),
		'NORP' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'J.1'
		),
		'DATE' => array(
			(int) 0 => '1976',
			(int) 1 => '1973',
			(int) 2 => '1911',
			(int) 3 => '1860',
			(int) 4 => '1991'
		),
		'EVENT' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'the 'Code''
		),
		'QUANTITY' => array(
			(int) 0 => '8-2-1991'
		),
		'CARDINAL' => array(
			(int) 0 => '12',
			(int) 1 => '16',
			(int) 2 => '2',
			(int) 3 => '2',
			(int) 4 => 'begar',
			(int) 5 => 'one',
			(int) 6 => '219',
			(int) 7 => '207',
			(int) 8 => 'begar',
			(int) 9 => '2',
			(int) 10 => '1'
		),
		'GPE' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'paddy',
			(int) 1 => 'India',
			(int) 2 => 'or(4',
			(int) 3 => 'United States of America',
			(int) 4 => 'U.S.',
			(int) 5 => 'Bonded Labour'
		)
	),
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '535131',
			'acts' => 'Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - Sections 2, 4, 16 and 17; <a href="/act/50902/code-of-criminal-procedure-1973-complete-act">Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973</a> - Sections 482; <a href="/act/51485/indian-penal-code-45-of-1860-complete-act">Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860</a> - Sections 374; <a href="/act/51737/constitution-of-india-complete-act">Constitution of India</a> - Article 23(1)',
			'appealno' => 'Criminal Misc. Cases No. 1204 of 1991',
			'appellant' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty',
			'authreffered' => '',
			'casename' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr.',
			'casenote' => ' - LABOUR & SERVICES 
Pay Scale:[Tarun Chatterjee & R.M. Lodha,JJ] Fixation - Orissa Service Code (1939), Rule 74(b)  Promotion - Government servant, by virtue of Rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - Circular Dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier Circular Dated 18.6.1982 resulting in  reduction of pay of employee on promotion  Held, It is not legal. Statutory Rules cannot be altered or amended by such Executive orders or Circulars or Instructions nor can they replace Statutory Rules.
 -  Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;',
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => '(See Bailey v. Alabana;',
			'citingcases' => '',
			'counselplain' => 'M.B.K. Rao, Adv.',
			'counseldef' => 'Addl. Standing Counsel (for No. 1)',
			'court' => 'Orissa',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '1994-11-22',
			'deposition' => 'Petition allowed',
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'A. Pasayat, J.',
			'judgement' => 'ORDER<p style="text-align: justify;">A. Pasayat, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. Order of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaypore (in short SDM) directing institution of the case under Section 17 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (in short the 'Act') was assailed before the revisional forum, and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaypore having refused to accept the prayer for interference, this application for exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short the 'Code') has been filed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. Acting on a report received from the Welfare Extension Officer, Khurda alleging that the petitioner Narayan Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as 'employer') had engaged Padam Talia (hereinafter referred to as 'Labourer') Direction for institution of the case under Section 17 of the Act was given, and parties were directed to appear before Court on 8-2-1991 to substantiate their respective claims. The report inter alia stated that the 'employer' had advanced a sum of Rs. 150/-, and the labourer was rendering service under bonded Labourer Scheme. The employer was being paid Rs. 120/- and 12 pauttis of paddy per year. This according to learned S.D.M. disclosed commission of offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act and therefore the proceeding was initiated. Against the said order dated 16-1 -1991, revisional fourm was moved as indicated above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">3. According to petitioner, ingredients necessary to constitute an offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act are squarely absent, and therefore proceeding was misconceived and the Revisional Fourm was not justified in holding that there was ample material for continuance of the proceeding. There is no appearance at the time of hearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2. Learned counsel for the State supported the orders.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">4. Section 17 provides for punishment for advancement of bonded debt. Section 2(d) of the Act defines 'bonded debt', and it reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Section 2(d) 'bonded debt' means an advance obtained, or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under, or in pursuance of the bonded labourer scheme.'</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Bonded Labour system' is defined in section 2(g) which reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Section 2(g) Bonded labour system' means the system of forded, or partly forced, labour under which a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that:--</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any of his lineal ascendents or descendants (whether or not such advance is evidenced by any document) and in consideration of the interest, if any, due on such advance, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iii) in pursuance of an obligation devolving on him by succession, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any of his lineral ascendants or descendant's, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(v) by reason of his birth in any particular casts or community</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family, or any person dependent on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor for a specified period or for an unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or </p><p style="text-align: justify;">(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified period or or an unspecified period, of</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or product of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person dependent on him and includes the system of forced, or partly forced. Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;</p><p style="text-align: justify;">5. System of very under which the debtor or his descendants or dependants have to work for the creditor without reasonable wages or with no wage in order to extinguish the debt, and sometimes people work for several generations under bondage for the repayment of a paltry sum which had been taken by some remote ancestors, infringe the basic human rights and destroy the dignity of human labour. It is apparently repugnant to Articles 23(1) of the Constitution which confers right against exploitation. Under said provision, traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention is an offence punishable in accordance with law. Bonded Labour System means, labour or service extracted by pressing power without even any remuneration for it. Forced labour is a wide expression which may be imputed the same meaning, as given in Constitution of United States of America, to 'involuntary servitude'. The said expression has been interpreted to include any kind of 'control by which the personal service of one man in disposed of or served for mothers' benefit? (See Bailey v. Alabana) (1911) 219 U.S. 207. Section 374 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') makes unlawful compulsory labour punishable in law. Unlawfully compelling any person to labour against the will of that person is as an offence. Sweep of 'forced labour' in Article 23(1) of the Constitution is wider in its applicability than Section 374, IPC, because forced labour in Article 23(1) is to be understood in the contest of begar and other similar forms of forced labour in that clause. It terms of Section 2(g) of the Act bonded labour is any labour or service rendered under the bonded labour system. Section 4 of the Act provides that on the commencement of the Act, the bonded labour system shall stand abolished, and every bonded labour shall on such commencement, stand freed and discharged from any obligation to render any bonded labour. Sub-section (2) provides that after commencement of the Act, no person shall make any advance under or in pursuance of the bonded labour system, or compel any person to render any bonded labour or other form of forced labour. Section 16 makes enforcement of bonded labour punishable and any person who compels another to render any bonded labour is punishable thereunder. In order to attract application of Section 17, there must be material to show that there was existence of bonded labour system, and the bonded debt was advanced after commencement of the Act implying thereby that there was enforcement of bonded labour system.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">6. Complaint petition does not show when the alleged advance was made i.e. whether prior to commencement of the Act or subsequent thereto. Witnesses examined at the time of enquiry do not also throw any light in that regard. The allegation is that the labourer during sometime past worked as domestic servant in the house of the petitioner, and received some wages. Unfortunately there is no material to show existence of relationship of creditor and debtor between the labourer and employer, and that for the discharge of the said debt, the labourer, had been engaged in the work either free or for paltry sum. In the absence of such material, continuance of the proceeding would be gross abuse of process of law. Accordingly proceeding in Bonded Labour case No. 1 of 1991 before learned SDM, Jaypore is quashed.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => '',
			'pubs' => '1995CriLJ1788',
			'ratiodecidendi' => '',
			'respondent' => 'State of Orissa and anr.',
			'sub' => 'Criminal',
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '535131'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr. Semantic Analysis'
$shops = array(
	'LAW' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 1 => 'Section 482',
		(int) 2 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 3 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 4 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 5 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 6 => 'Section 2(d',
		(int) 7 => 'Constitution',
		(int) 8 => 'Article 23(1',
		(int) 9 => 'Constitution',
		(int) 10 => 'Article 23(1',
		(int) 11 => 'Section 2(g',
		(int) 12 => 'Section 4 of the Act',
		(int) 13 => 'Section 16',
		(int) 14 => 'Section 17'
	),
	'ORG' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'ORDERA',
		(int) 1 => 'Sub-Divisional Magistrate',
		(int) 2 => 'Additional Sessions',
		(int) 3 => 'the Welfare Extension Officer',
		(int) 4 => 'Court',
		(int) 5 => 'S.D.M.',
		(int) 6 => 'the Revisional Fourm',
		(int) 7 => 'State',
		(int) 8 => 'Labour System',
		(int) 9 => 'Section 374 Indian Penal Code',
		(int) 10 => 'IPC'
	),
	'PERSON' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Pasayat',
		(int) 1 => 'Jaypore',
		(int) 2 => 'Khurda',
		(int) 3 => 'Narayan Mohanty',
		(int) 4 => 'Padam Talia',
		(int) 5 => 'Labourer Scheme',
		(int) 6 => 'Articles 23(1',
		(int) 7 => 'Bailey',
		(int) 8 => 'Alabana',
		(int) 9 => 'IPC',
		(int) 10 => 'Jaypore'
	),
	'NORP' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'J.1'
	),
	'DATE' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1976',
		(int) 1 => '1973',
		(int) 2 => '1911',
		(int) 3 => '1860',
		(int) 4 => '1991'
	),
	'EVENT' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'the 'Code''
	),
	'QUANTITY' => array(
		(int) 0 => '8-2-1991'
	),
	'CARDINAL' => array(
		(int) 0 => '12',
		(int) 1 => '16',
		(int) 2 => '2',
		(int) 3 => '2',
		(int) 4 => 'begar',
		(int) 5 => 'one',
		(int) 6 => '219',
		(int) 7 => '207',
		(int) 8 => 'begar',
		(int) 9 => '2',
		(int) 10 => '1'
	),
	'GPE' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'paddy',
		(int) 1 => 'India',
		(int) 2 => 'or(4',
		(int) 3 => 'United States of America',
		(int) 4 => 'U.S.',
		(int) 5 => 'Bonded Labour'
	)
)
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '535131',
		'acts' => 'Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - Sections 2, 4, 16 and 17; <a href="/act/50902/code-of-criminal-procedure-1973-complete-act">Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973</a> - Sections 482; <a href="/act/51485/indian-penal-code-45-of-1860-complete-act">Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860</a> - Sections 374; <a href="/act/51737/constitution-of-india-complete-act">Constitution of India</a> - Article 23(1)',
		'appealno' => 'Criminal Misc. Cases No. 1204 of 1991',
		'appellant' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty',
		'authreffered' => '',
		'casename' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr.',
		'casenote' => ' - LABOUR & SERVICES 
Pay Scale:[Tarun Chatterjee & R.M. Lodha,JJ] Fixation - Orissa Service Code (1939), Rule 74(b)  Promotion - Government servant, by virtue of Rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - Circular Dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier Circular Dated 18.6.1982 resulting in  reduction of pay of employee on promotion  Held, It is not legal. Statutory Rules cannot be altered or amended by such Executive orders or Circulars or Instructions nor can they replace Statutory Rules.
 -  Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => '(See Bailey v. Alabana;',
		'citingcases' => '',
		'counselplain' => 'M.B.K. Rao, Adv.',
		'counseldef' => 'Addl. Standing Counsel (for No. 1)',
		'court' => 'Orissa',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '1994-11-22',
		'deposition' => 'Petition allowed',
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'A. Pasayat, J.',
		'judgement' => 'ORDER<p style="text-align: justify;">A. Pasayat, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. Order of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaypore (in short SDM) directing institution of the case under Section 17 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (in short the 'Act') was assailed before the revisional forum, and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaypore having refused to accept the prayer for interference, this application for exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short the 'Code') has been filed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. Acting on a report received from the Welfare Extension Officer, Khurda alleging that the petitioner Narayan Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as 'employer') had engaged Padam Talia (hereinafter referred to as 'Labourer') Direction for institution of the case under Section 17 of the Act was given, and parties were directed to appear before Court on 8-2-1991 to substantiate their respective claims. The report inter alia stated that the 'employer' had advanced a sum of Rs. 150/-, and the labourer was rendering service under bonded Labourer Scheme. The employer was being paid Rs. 120/- and 12 pauttis of paddy per year. This according to learned S.D.M. disclosed commission of offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act and therefore the proceeding was initiated. Against the said order dated 16-1 -1991, revisional fourm was moved as indicated above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">3. According to petitioner, ingredients necessary to constitute an offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act are squarely absent, and therefore proceeding was misconceived and the Revisional Fourm was not justified in holding that there was ample material for continuance of the proceeding. There is no appearance at the time of hearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2. Learned counsel for the State supported the orders.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">4. Section 17 provides for punishment for advancement of bonded debt. Section 2(d) of the Act defines 'bonded debt', and it reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Section 2(d) 'bonded debt' means an advance obtained, or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under, or in pursuance of the bonded labourer scheme.'</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Bonded Labour system' is defined in section 2(g) which reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Section 2(g) Bonded labour system' means the system of forded, or partly forced, labour under which a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that:--</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any of his lineal ascendents or descendants (whether or not such advance is evidenced by any document) and in consideration of the interest, if any, due on such advance, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iii) in pursuance of an obligation devolving on him by succession, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any of his lineral ascendants or descendant's, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(v) by reason of his birth in any particular casts or community</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family, or any person dependent on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor for a specified period or for an unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or </p><p style="text-align: justify;">(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified period or or an unspecified period, of</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or product of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person dependent on him and includes the system of forced, or partly forced. Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;</p><p style="text-align: justify;">5. System of very under which the debtor or his descendants or dependants have to work for the creditor without reasonable wages or with no wage in order to extinguish the debt, and sometimes people work for several generations under bondage for the repayment of a paltry sum which had been taken by some remote ancestors, infringe the basic human rights and destroy the dignity of human labour. It is apparently repugnant to Articles 23(1) of the Constitution which confers right against exploitation. Under said provision, traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention is an offence punishable in accordance with law. Bonded Labour System means, labour or service extracted by pressing power without even any remuneration for it. Forced labour is a wide expression which may be imputed the same meaning, as given in Constitution of United States of America, to 'involuntary servitude'. The said expression has been interpreted to include any kind of 'control by which the personal service of one man in disposed of or served for mothers' benefit? (See Bailey v. Alabana) (1911) 219 U.S. 207. Section 374 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') makes unlawful compulsory labour punishable in law. Unlawfully compelling any person to labour against the will of that person is as an offence. Sweep of 'forced labour' in Article 23(1) of the Constitution is wider in its applicability than Section 374, IPC, because forced labour in Article 23(1) is to be understood in the contest of begar and other similar forms of forced labour in that clause. It terms of Section 2(g) of the Act bonded labour is any labour or service rendered under the bonded labour system. Section 4 of the Act provides that on the commencement of the Act, the bonded labour system shall stand abolished, and every bonded labour shall on such commencement, stand freed and discharged from any obligation to render any bonded labour. Sub-section (2) provides that after commencement of the Act, no person shall make any advance under or in pursuance of the bonded labour system, or compel any person to render any bonded labour or other form of forced labour. Section 16 makes enforcement of bonded labour punishable and any person who compels another to render any bonded labour is punishable thereunder. In order to attract application of Section 17, there must be material to show that there was existence of bonded labour system, and the bonded debt was advanced after commencement of the Act implying thereby that there was enforcement of bonded labour system.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">6. Complaint petition does not show when the alleged advance was made i.e. whether prior to commencement of the Act or subsequent thereto. Witnesses examined at the time of enquiry do not also throw any light in that regard. The allegation is that the labourer during sometime past worked as domestic servant in the house of the petitioner, and received some wages. Unfortunately there is no material to show existence of relationship of creditor and debtor between the labourer and employer, and that for the discharge of the said debt, the labourer, had been engaged in the work either free or for paltry sum. In the absence of such material, continuance of the proceeding would be gross abuse of process of law. Accordingly proceeding in Bonded Labour case No. 1 of 1991 before learned SDM, Jaypore is quashed.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => '',
		'pubs' => '1995CriLJ1788',
		'ratiodecidendi' => '',
		'respondent' => 'State of Orissa and anr.',
		'sub' => 'Criminal',
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '535131'
)
$pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/'
include - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]
Code Context
//$shops = $shops['entities'];

foreach ($shops2 as $key => $val) {
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr. Semantic Analysis',
	'shops' => array(
		'LAW' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 1 => 'Section 482',
			(int) 2 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 3 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 4 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 5 => 'Section 17',
			(int) 6 => 'Section 2(d',
			(int) 7 => 'Constitution',
			(int) 8 => 'Article 23(1',
			(int) 9 => 'Constitution',
			(int) 10 => 'Article 23(1',
			(int) 11 => 'Section 2(g',
			(int) 12 => 'Section 4 of the Act',
			(int) 13 => 'Section 16',
			(int) 14 => 'Section 17'
		),
		'ORG' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'ORDERA',
			(int) 1 => 'Sub-Divisional Magistrate',
			(int) 2 => 'Additional Sessions',
			(int) 3 => 'the Welfare Extension Officer',
			(int) 4 => 'Court',
			(int) 5 => 'S.D.M.',
			(int) 6 => 'the Revisional Fourm',
			(int) 7 => 'State',
			(int) 8 => 'Labour System',
			(int) 9 => 'Section 374 Indian Penal Code',
			(int) 10 => 'IPC'
		),
		'PERSON' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Pasayat',
			(int) 1 => 'Jaypore',
			(int) 2 => 'Khurda',
			(int) 3 => 'Narayan Mohanty',
			(int) 4 => 'Padam Talia',
			(int) 5 => 'Labourer Scheme',
			(int) 6 => 'Articles 23(1',
			(int) 7 => 'Bailey',
			(int) 8 => 'Alabana',
			(int) 9 => 'IPC',
			(int) 10 => 'Jaypore'
		),
		'NORP' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'J.1'
		),
		'DATE' => array(
			(int) 0 => '1976',
			(int) 1 => '1973',
			(int) 2 => '1911',
			(int) 3 => '1860',
			(int) 4 => '1991'
		),
		'EVENT' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'the 'Code''
		),
		'QUANTITY' => array(
			(int) 0 => '8-2-1991'
		),
		'CARDINAL' => array(
			(int) 0 => '12',
			(int) 1 => '16',
			(int) 2 => '2',
			(int) 3 => '2',
			(int) 4 => 'begar',
			(int) 5 => 'one',
			(int) 6 => '219',
			(int) 7 => '207',
			(int) 8 => 'begar',
			(int) 9 => '2',
			(int) 10 => '1'
		),
		'GPE' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'paddy',
			(int) 1 => 'India',
			(int) 2 => 'or(4',
			(int) 3 => 'United States of America',
			(int) 4 => 'U.S.',
			(int) 5 => 'Bonded Labour'
		)
	),
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '535131',
			'acts' => 'Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - Sections 2, 4, 16 and 17; <a href="/act/50902/code-of-criminal-procedure-1973-complete-act">Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973</a> - Sections 482; <a href="/act/51485/indian-penal-code-45-of-1860-complete-act">Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860</a> - Sections 374; <a href="/act/51737/constitution-of-india-complete-act">Constitution of India</a> - Article 23(1)',
			'appealno' => 'Criminal Misc. Cases No. 1204 of 1991',
			'appellant' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty',
			'authreffered' => '',
			'casename' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr.',
			'casenote' => ' - LABOUR & SERVICES 
Pay Scale:[Tarun Chatterjee & R.M. Lodha,JJ] Fixation - Orissa Service Code (1939), Rule 74(b)  Promotion - Government servant, by virtue of Rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - Circular Dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier Circular Dated 18.6.1982 resulting in  reduction of pay of employee on promotion  Held, It is not legal. Statutory Rules cannot be altered or amended by such Executive orders or Circulars or Instructions nor can they replace Statutory Rules.
 -  Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;',
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => '(See Bailey v. Alabana;',
			'citingcases' => '',
			'counselplain' => 'M.B.K. Rao, Adv.',
			'counseldef' => 'Addl. Standing Counsel (for No. 1)',
			'court' => 'Orissa',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '1994-11-22',
			'deposition' => 'Petition allowed',
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'A. Pasayat, J.',
			'judgement' => 'ORDER<p style="text-align: justify;">A. Pasayat, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. Order of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaypore (in short SDM) directing institution of the case under Section 17 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (in short the 'Act') was assailed before the revisional forum, and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaypore having refused to accept the prayer for interference, this application for exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short the 'Code') has been filed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. Acting on a report received from the Welfare Extension Officer, Khurda alleging that the petitioner Narayan Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as 'employer') had engaged Padam Talia (hereinafter referred to as 'Labourer') Direction for institution of the case under Section 17 of the Act was given, and parties were directed to appear before Court on 8-2-1991 to substantiate their respective claims. The report inter alia stated that the 'employer' had advanced a sum of Rs. 150/-, and the labourer was rendering service under bonded Labourer Scheme. The employer was being paid Rs. 120/- and 12 pauttis of paddy per year. This according to learned S.D.M. disclosed commission of offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act and therefore the proceeding was initiated. Against the said order dated 16-1 -1991, revisional fourm was moved as indicated above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">3. According to petitioner, ingredients necessary to constitute an offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act are squarely absent, and therefore proceeding was misconceived and the Revisional Fourm was not justified in holding that there was ample material for continuance of the proceeding. There is no appearance at the time of hearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2. Learned counsel for the State supported the orders.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">4. Section 17 provides for punishment for advancement of bonded debt. Section 2(d) of the Act defines 'bonded debt', and it reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Section 2(d) 'bonded debt' means an advance obtained, or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under, or in pursuance of the bonded labourer scheme.'</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Bonded Labour system' is defined in section 2(g) which reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Section 2(g) Bonded labour system' means the system of forded, or partly forced, labour under which a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that:--</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any of his lineal ascendents or descendants (whether or not such advance is evidenced by any document) and in consideration of the interest, if any, due on such advance, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iii) in pursuance of an obligation devolving on him by succession, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any of his lineral ascendants or descendant's, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(v) by reason of his birth in any particular casts or community</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family, or any person dependent on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor for a specified period or for an unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or </p><p style="text-align: justify;">(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified period or or an unspecified period, of</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or product of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person dependent on him and includes the system of forced, or partly forced. Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;</p><p style="text-align: justify;">5. System of very under which the debtor or his descendants or dependants have to work for the creditor without reasonable wages or with no wage in order to extinguish the debt, and sometimes people work for several generations under bondage for the repayment of a paltry sum which had been taken by some remote ancestors, infringe the basic human rights and destroy the dignity of human labour. It is apparently repugnant to Articles 23(1) of the Constitution which confers right against exploitation. Under said provision, traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention is an offence punishable in accordance with law. Bonded Labour System means, labour or service extracted by pressing power without even any remuneration for it. Forced labour is a wide expression which may be imputed the same meaning, as given in Constitution of United States of America, to 'involuntary servitude'. The said expression has been interpreted to include any kind of 'control by which the personal service of one man in disposed of or served for mothers' benefit? (See Bailey v. Alabana) (1911) 219 U.S. 207. Section 374 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') makes unlawful compulsory labour punishable in law. Unlawfully compelling any person to labour against the will of that person is as an offence. Sweep of 'forced labour' in Article 23(1) of the Constitution is wider in its applicability than Section 374, IPC, because forced labour in Article 23(1) is to be understood in the contest of begar and other similar forms of forced labour in that clause. It terms of Section 2(g) of the Act bonded labour is any labour or service rendered under the bonded labour system. Section 4 of the Act provides that on the commencement of the Act, the bonded labour system shall stand abolished, and every bonded labour shall on such commencement, stand freed and discharged from any obligation to render any bonded labour. Sub-section (2) provides that after commencement of the Act, no person shall make any advance under or in pursuance of the bonded labour system, or compel any person to render any bonded labour or other form of forced labour. Section 16 makes enforcement of bonded labour punishable and any person who compels another to render any bonded labour is punishable thereunder. In order to attract application of Section 17, there must be material to show that there was existence of bonded labour system, and the bonded debt was advanced after commencement of the Act implying thereby that there was enforcement of bonded labour system.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">6. Complaint petition does not show when the alleged advance was made i.e. whether prior to commencement of the Act or subsequent thereto. Witnesses examined at the time of enquiry do not also throw any light in that regard. The allegation is that the labourer during sometime past worked as domestic servant in the house of the petitioner, and received some wages. Unfortunately there is no material to show existence of relationship of creditor and debtor between the labourer and employer, and that for the discharge of the said debt, the labourer, had been engaged in the work either free or for paltry sum. In the absence of such material, continuance of the proceeding would be gross abuse of process of law. Accordingly proceeding in Bonded Labour case No. 1 of 1991 before learned SDM, Jaypore is quashed.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => '',
			'pubs' => '1995CriLJ1788',
			'ratiodecidendi' => '',
			'respondent' => 'State of Orissa and anr.',
			'sub' => 'Criminal',
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '535131'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr. Semantic Analysis'
$shops = array(
	'LAW' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 1 => 'Section 482',
		(int) 2 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 3 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 4 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 5 => 'Section 17',
		(int) 6 => 'Section 2(d',
		(int) 7 => 'Constitution',
		(int) 8 => 'Article 23(1',
		(int) 9 => 'Constitution',
		(int) 10 => 'Article 23(1',
		(int) 11 => 'Section 2(g',
		(int) 12 => 'Section 4 of the Act',
		(int) 13 => 'Section 16',
		(int) 14 => 'Section 17'
	),
	'ORG' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'ORDERA',
		(int) 1 => 'Sub-Divisional Magistrate',
		(int) 2 => 'Additional Sessions',
		(int) 3 => 'the Welfare Extension Officer',
		(int) 4 => 'Court',
		(int) 5 => 'S.D.M.',
		(int) 6 => 'the Revisional Fourm',
		(int) 7 => 'State',
		(int) 8 => 'Labour System',
		(int) 9 => 'Section 374 Indian Penal Code',
		(int) 10 => 'IPC'
	),
	'PERSON' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Pasayat',
		(int) 1 => 'Jaypore',
		(int) 2 => 'Khurda',
		(int) 3 => 'Narayan Mohanty',
		(int) 4 => 'Padam Talia',
		(int) 5 => 'Labourer Scheme',
		(int) 6 => 'Articles 23(1',
		(int) 7 => 'Bailey',
		(int) 8 => 'Alabana',
		(int) 9 => 'IPC',
		(int) 10 => 'Jaypore'
	),
	'NORP' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'J.1'
	),
	'DATE' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1976',
		(int) 1 => '1973',
		(int) 2 => '1911',
		(int) 3 => '1860',
		(int) 4 => '1991'
	),
	'EVENT' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'the 'Code''
	),
	'QUANTITY' => array(
		(int) 0 => '8-2-1991'
	),
	'CARDINAL' => array(
		(int) 0 => '12',
		(int) 1 => '16',
		(int) 2 => '2',
		(int) 3 => '2',
		(int) 4 => 'begar',
		(int) 5 => 'one',
		(int) 6 => '219',
		(int) 7 => '207',
		(int) 8 => 'begar',
		(int) 9 => '2',
		(int) 10 => '1'
	),
	'GPE' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'paddy',
		(int) 1 => 'India',
		(int) 2 => 'or(4',
		(int) 3 => 'United States of America',
		(int) 4 => 'U.S.',
		(int) 5 => 'Bonded Labour'
	)
)
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '535131',
		'acts' => 'Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - Sections 2, 4, 16 and 17; <a href="/act/50902/code-of-criminal-procedure-1973-complete-act">Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973</a> - Sections 482; <a href="/act/51485/indian-penal-code-45-of-1860-complete-act">Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860</a> - Sections 374; <a href="/act/51737/constitution-of-india-complete-act">Constitution of India</a> - Article 23(1)',
		'appealno' => 'Criminal Misc. Cases No. 1204 of 1991',
		'appellant' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty',
		'authreffered' => '',
		'casename' => 'Sri Narayan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and anr.',
		'casenote' => ' - LABOUR & SERVICES 
Pay Scale:[Tarun Chatterjee & R.M. Lodha,JJ] Fixation - Orissa Service Code (1939), Rule 74(b)  Promotion - Government servant, by virtue of Rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - Circular Dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier Circular Dated 18.6.1982 resulting in  reduction of pay of employee on promotion  Held, It is not legal. Statutory Rules cannot be altered or amended by such Executive orders or Circulars or Instructions nor can they replace Statutory Rules.
 -  Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => '(See Bailey v. Alabana;',
		'citingcases' => '',
		'counselplain' => 'M.B.K. Rao, Adv.',
		'counseldef' => 'Addl. Standing Counsel (for No. 1)',
		'court' => 'Orissa',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '1994-11-22',
		'deposition' => 'Petition allowed',
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'A. Pasayat, J.',
		'judgement' => 'ORDER<p style="text-align: justify;">A. Pasayat, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. Order of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaypore (in short SDM) directing institution of the case under Section 17 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (in short the 'Act') was assailed before the revisional forum, and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaypore having refused to accept the prayer for interference, this application for exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short the 'Code') has been filed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. Acting on a report received from the Welfare Extension Officer, Khurda alleging that the petitioner Narayan Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as 'employer') had engaged Padam Talia (hereinafter referred to as 'Labourer') Direction for institution of the case under Section 17 of the Act was given, and parties were directed to appear before Court on 8-2-1991 to substantiate their respective claims. The report inter alia stated that the 'employer' had advanced a sum of Rs. 150/-, and the labourer was rendering service under bonded Labourer Scheme. The employer was being paid Rs. 120/- and 12 pauttis of paddy per year. This according to learned S.D.M. disclosed commission of offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act and therefore the proceeding was initiated. Against the said order dated 16-1 -1991, revisional fourm was moved as indicated above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">3. According to petitioner, ingredients necessary to constitute an offence punishable under Section 17 of the Act are squarely absent, and therefore proceeding was misconceived and the Revisional Fourm was not justified in holding that there was ample material for continuance of the proceeding. There is no appearance at the time of hearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2. Learned counsel for the State supported the orders.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">4. Section 17 provides for punishment for advancement of bonded debt. Section 2(d) of the Act defines 'bonded debt', and it reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Section 2(d) 'bonded debt' means an advance obtained, or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under, or in pursuance of the bonded labourer scheme.'</p><p style="text-align: justify;">'Bonded Labour system' is defined in section 2(g) which reads as follows :</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Section 2(g) Bonded labour system' means the system of forded, or partly forced, labour under which a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that:--</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any of his lineal ascendents or descendants (whether or not such advance is evidenced by any document) and in consideration of the interest, if any, due on such advance, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iii) in pursuance of an obligation devolving on him by succession, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any of his lineral ascendants or descendant's, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(v) by reason of his birth in any particular casts or community</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family, or any person dependent on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor for a specified period or for an unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or </p><p style="text-align: justify;">(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified period or or an unspecified period, of</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or</p><p style="text-align: justify;">(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or product of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person dependent on him and includes the system of forced, or partly forced. Labour under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has or is presumed to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would render the handed labour on behalf of the debtor;</p><p style="text-align: justify;">5. System of very under which the debtor or his descendants or dependants have to work for the creditor without reasonable wages or with no wage in order to extinguish the debt, and sometimes people work for several generations under bondage for the repayment of a paltry sum which had been taken by some remote ancestors, infringe the basic human rights and destroy the dignity of human labour. It is apparently repugnant to Articles 23(1) of the Constitution which confers right against exploitation. Under said provision, traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention is an offence punishable in accordance with law. Bonded Labour System means, labour or service extracted by pressing power without even any remuneration for it. Forced labour is a wide expression which may be imputed the same meaning, as given in Constitution of United States of America, to 'involuntary servitude'. The said expression has been interpreted to include any kind of 'control by which the personal service of one man in disposed of or served for mothers' benefit? (See Bailey v. Alabana) (1911) 219 U.S. 207. Section 374 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') makes unlawful compulsory labour punishable in law. Unlawfully compelling any person to labour against the will of that person is as an offence. Sweep of 'forced labour' in Article 23(1) of the Constitution is wider in its applicability than Section 374, IPC, because forced labour in Article 23(1) is to be understood in the contest of begar and other similar forms of forced labour in that clause. It terms of Section 2(g) of the Act bonded labour is any labour or service rendered under the bonded labour system. Section 4 of the Act provides that on the commencement of the Act, the bonded labour system shall stand abolished, and every bonded labour shall on such commencement, stand freed and discharged from any obligation to render any bonded labour. Sub-section (2) provides that after commencement of the Act, no person shall make any advance under or in pursuance of the bonded labour system, or compel any person to render any bonded labour or other form of forced labour. Section 16 makes enforcement of bonded labour punishable and any person who compels another to render any bonded labour is punishable thereunder. In order to attract application of Section 17, there must be material to show that there was existence of bonded labour system, and the bonded debt was advanced after commencement of the Act implying thereby that there was enforcement of bonded labour system.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">6. Complaint petition does not show when the alleged advance was made i.e. whether prior to commencement of the Act or subsequent thereto. Witnesses examined at the time of enquiry do not also throw any light in that regard. The allegation is that the labourer during sometime past worked as domestic servant in the house of the petitioner, and received some wages. Unfortunately there is no material to show existence of relationship of creditor and debtor between the labourer and employer, and that for the discharge of the said debt, the labourer, had been engaged in the work either free or for paltry sum. In the absence of such material, continuance of the proceeding would be gross abuse of process of law. Accordingly proceeding in Bonded Labour case No. 1 of 1991 before learned SDM, Jaypore is quashed.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => '',
		'pubs' => '1995CriLJ1788',
		'ratiodecidendi' => '',
		'respondent' => 'State of Orissa and anr.',
		'sub' => 'Criminal',
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '535131'
)
$pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/'
$shops2 = null
include - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

LAW: Section 17, Section 482, Section 17, Section 17, Section 17, Section 17, Section 2(d, Constitution, Article 23(1, Constitution, Article 23(1, Section 2(g, Section 4 of the Act, Section 16, Section 17

ORG: ORDERA, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Additional Sessions, the Welfare Extension Officer, Court, S.D.M., the Revisional Fourm, State, Labour System, Section 374 Indian Penal Code, IPC

PERSON: Pasayat, Jaypore, Khurda, Narayan Mohanty, Padam Talia, Labourer Scheme, Articles 23(1, Bailey, Alabana, IPC, Jaypore

NORP: J.1

DATE: 1976, 1973, 1911, 1860, 1991

EVENT: the 'Code'

QUANTITY: 8-2-1991

CARDINAL: 12, 16, 2, 2, begar, one, 219, 207, begar, 2, 1

GPE: paddy, India, or(4, United States of America, U.S., Bonded Labour