Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2013 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 365 - DELHI HIGH COURTProspectus containing untrue statements - Petitioners seek quashing of the complaint under Section 63 r.w.s. 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 filed against them by ROC on the premise that they being signatory to the prospectus which contained untrue statements - Held that:- The certified copy of the prospectus obtained from Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. shows that the three Petitioners were the directors and signatories of the prospectus. Thus, it cannot be said that the ACMM while taking cognizance and issuing the process was misled by the averments made in para 2 of the complaint or that the averments were false. It has to be borne in mind that at the stage of issuing the process, the Magistrate is not required to record detailed reasons. Moreover, it is very well settled that inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code though very wide have to be invoked sparingly and with circumspection only (i) to give effect to an order under the Code, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of the Court and (iii) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. At this stage, the prospectus deposited with the Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. has to be presumed to be meant for the public at large which was signed by the Petitioners. Thus, the order dated 07.06.2002 taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 63 and 628 of the Act of 1956 against the Petitioners cannot be faulted. The observations made above were necessary for disposal of the instant Petition and shall not be taken as expression of any opinion on merits of the case.
|