{"id":254678,"date":"2021-09-24T12:00:22","date_gmt":"2021-09-24T06:30:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=254678"},"modified":"2021-09-30T18:43:44","modified_gmt":"2021-09-30T13:13:44","slug":"section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/","title":{"rendered":"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jharkhand High Court: <\/strong>Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J., held that Section 106 of the Factories Act is mandatory in nature and the Courts have no power to entertain the issue once the period prescribed therein has ended.<\/p>\n

The petitioners had filed this petition for quashing the order passed in a revision petition filed by the petitioners had been dismissed. The further prayer was made for quashing entire criminal proceeding initiated as against the petitioners.<\/p>\n

Background <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

A prosecution report was filed by the opposite party arraying the petitioners as accused with a prayer to take cognizance against them for allegedly committing an offence in terms of Section 92 of the Factories Act for violation of Rules 55(A )(2) and 56(A) of the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Factories Rules, 1950. The petitioners had been arrayed in their capacity as an occupier and Manager respectively of M\/s. Tata Steel Ltd.<\/p>\n

The complaint had been lodged in connection with an accident which took place on 19-06-2012 at 06:20 p.m. at G&H Blast Furnace Plavourize Coal bin\/hopper where it was alleged that at the time of installation of 600 Kg mouthpiece the upper portion of chain block was broken due to which Birju Prasad, Fitter who was standing under it was crushed by the said mouthpiece and had sustained grievous injuries. The injured workman was carried to the hospital but died during the course of treatment. It had been alleged that the accident took place due to violation of Rule 55(A)(2) and 56(A) for which the petitioners were responsible.<\/p>\n

Stand taken by the Petitioners<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

The petitioners contended that Section 106 of the Factories Act prescribes the period of limitation for three months for filing the complaint, under Section 92 of the Factories Act from the date of occurrence. Evidently, the date of occurrence was 19-06-2012 and the opposite party 2 inspected the place of occurrence on 20-06-2012 and subsequently, required information was furnished in statutory Form 17A by the company.<\/p>\n

Hence, the petitioners contended that the knowledge was there to the Inspector on 19-06-2012 itself and the complaint was filed on 20-09-2012. It was further submitted the complaint had been filed after 90 days which was against the mandatory provision made under Section 106 of the Factories Act. It was also submitted that there was no provision of condonation of delay.<\/p>\n

For ready reference, Section 106 of the Factories Act reads as under:-<\/p>\n

\u201c106. Limitation of prosecutions.\u2014No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act unless complaint thereof is made within three months of the date on which the alleged commission of the offence came to the knowledge of an Inspector…\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n

Findings and Conclusion<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

On perusal of Section 106 of the Factories Act, the Bench stated that the law with regard to filing of the complaint under the Factories Act within a period of three months from the date of commission of the offence or from the date of knowledge of the occurrence is crystal clear. Noticeably, it was in the knowledge of the Inspector that the occurrence took place on 19-06-2012 and the complaint was admittedly filed on 20-09-2012 and the cognizance under Section 92 of the Factories Act was taken against the petitioners even though there is no provision of condonation of delay.<\/p>\n

Hence, the Bench opined that the revisional court’s finding about the knowledge of date of filing of the report was erroneous as Section 106 clearly speaks that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence unless complaint is made within three months of the date on which the alleged commission of the offence came to the knowledge of an Inspector. Similarly, the Court was of the view that the Judicial Magistrate by taking cognizance had filled up the lines and section and had failed to apply judicial mind as the complaint petition itself was time barred under Section 106 of the Factories Act.<\/p>\n

In view of the aforesaid, the entire criminal proceedings including the revision order were quashed. [Hemant Madhusudan Nerurkar v. State of Jharkhand, 2021 SCC OnLine Jhar 624<\/b><\/a>, decided on 15-09-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Appearance:<\/strong><\/p>\n

For the Petitioners: Indrajit Sinha, Advocate<\/p>\n

For the Opposite Party-State: Veervijay Pradhan, A.P.P.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jharkhand High Court: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J., held that Section 106 of the Factories Act is mandatory in nature and the Courts <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[34096,43658,8911,3655,47178],"class_list":["post-254678","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-condonation","tag-factories-act","tag-labour-law","tag-limitation","tag-rights-of-workers"],"yoast_head":"\nJhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-09-24T06:30:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-09-30T13:13:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/Jharkhand-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/\",\"name\":\"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-09-24T06:30:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-09-30T13:13:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC | SCC Times","description":"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC","og_description":"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-09-24T06:30:22+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-09-30T13:13:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/Jharkhand-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/","name":"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-09-24T06:30:22+00:00","dateModified":"2021-09-30T13:13:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Section 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature courts cannot condone delay","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-106-of-the-factories-act-is-of-mandatory-nature-courts-cannot-condone-delay\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":266317,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/02\/whether-printing-press-is-a-manufacturing-process-under-employees-state-insurance-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":0},"title":"Whether \u2018Printing Press\u2019 is a manufacturing process under Employees State Insurance Act? All HC answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 2, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: \u00a0Stating that the word \u2018manufacturing process\u2019 has been expansively defined under the Factories Act even to include Printing Press activity as a manufacturing process whereas in common parlance Printing Press cannot be termed as a \u2018manufacturing process\u2019, Pankaj Bhatia, J., held that, the term \u2018manufacturing process\u2019 was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":211935,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":1},"title":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 13, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court:\u00a0Asha Arora, J., allowed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (dishonour of cheque). To cut the matter short, the present\u00a0was a cheque bounce matter. The complainants\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":267159,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/20\/writ-petition-not-maintainable-due-to-having-an-alternative-and-efficacious-remedy-under-s-17-of-the-sarfaesi-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":2},"title":"Raj HC | Writ Petition not maintainable due to having an alternative and efficacious remedy under S. 17 of the SARFAESI Act","author":"Editor","date":"May 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. dismissed the writ petition in view of availability of alternative remedy to the petitioners under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.\u00a0 The instant writ petition was filed by the borrowers for quashing the order dated 15-03-2022 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":217712,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/05\/ker-hc-trust-is-an-obligation-annexed-to-ownership-of-property-cannot-be-prosecuted-under-ni-act-as-it-is-neither-a-body-corporate-nor-an-association-of\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":3},"title":"Ker HC | \u2018Trust\u2019 is an \u2018obligation annexed to ownership of property\u2019 \u2013 cannot be prosecuted under NI Act as it is neither a body corporate nor an association of individuals","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 5, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: B Sudheendra Kumar, J. allowed the petition and quashed the complaint and further proceedings against the petitioners which were filed by the Respondent 2. In the instant case, Respondent 2, Branch Manager, had filed a complaint against the petitioners, trustees of a trust, alleging offence under Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":244132,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/19\/cooling-off-period\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":4},"title":"Madras HC | Husband and Wife living separately for past 13 years. Can cooling-off period under S. 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 be waived off, if sought mutually ? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 19, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: J. Nisha Banu, J., while addressing a revision petition directed the Family Court to waive off the cooling-off period in view of the petitioners living separately for the past 13 years. The instant petition was filed to seek direction to waive off the cooling period. The revision\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":280825,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/02\/prayer-quash-ecir-deter-coercive-action-against-sky-light-and-mahesh-nagar-found-no-ground-grant-relief-petitioners-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":254678,"position":5},"title":"Explained | Why Rajasthan High Court denied relief to Robert Vadra in Money Laundering Case","author":"Editor","date":"January 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Courts must certainly step in and thwart any and all kinds of injustice, malafide and\/or arbitrary exercise of executive power on the liberty of the citizens of this country; however, in absence of the same, any judicial interference in the domain of the executive, would be unwarranted.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Rajasthan High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image40.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254678","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=254678"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254678\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=254678"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=254678"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=254678"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}