Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2010 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (6) TMI 333 - HIGH COURT OF PATNACognizance of the offences under sections 120B, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the accused persons including the two petitioners - Held that:- In view of the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioners had committed any offence, as alleged by the complainant and, accordingly, it was required on the part of the complainant to inform the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at the time of filing of the complaint petition regarding the present status of the company in question. Had it been disclosed in the complaint petition, there was every possibility of rejection of the complaint petition. In sum and substance, in absence of availability of the correct fact, it appears that the learned Magistrate had proceeded with the complaint petition and passed the order of cognizance. In view of the facts and circumstances, as indicated hereirnabove, the court is satisfied that allowing the present complaint petition to proceed further will amount to allowing abuse of the process of the court. It would also not be appropriate to direct the petitioners to participate in the proceeding, which was stayed in the year 2000, i.e., after a lapse of such a long time. Accordingly, the order of cognizance dated 17-11-1997, as well as the entire proceedings in Complaint Case No. 919 of 1997 is set aside so far as it relates to the two petitioners of this case.
|