Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (3) TMI 366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to interfere with the investigation/trial of criminal cases and should not stall the investigation or prosecution except when it is convinced beyond doubt that the FIR or charge sheet does not disclose commission of offence or prosecution is barred by law or it is necessary to interfere to prevent the abuse of process of the Court. The charge sheet would disclose that the police collected the evidence as per the record of Registrar of Companies, which was a statutory record. They also collected the e-mail given by A3 to the complainant wherein he admitted that he acted upon the instructions of A1. Thus, there was prima facie evidence collected by the investigating officer to prove the offences against the petitioners under Sections 406 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... td. The company was having share capital of ₹ 1,00,000/- i.e. 10,000 shares of ₹ 10/- each. The petitioners No.1 and 2 - A1 and A2 along with the complainant were running a company under the name and style of M/s.Sarda Agro Oils Ltd., and obtained a loan of ₹ 143.00 crores from Allahabad Bank, Himayatnagar branch, Hyderabad and Bank of Baroda, Himayatnagar branch, Hyderabad. The complainant and his wife had given personal guarantee and also mortgaged their properties. The complainant was holding major shares i.e. 9990 and the 1st petitioner - A1 was holding 10 shares worth ₹ 10/- each in M/s.BRS Refineries Pvt. Ltd. On 21-12-2011, the wife of the complainant was appointed as Additional Director of the said company. A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 156(3) Cr.P.C. The same was registered as Crime 335 of 2013 by Sultan Bazaar Police and after investigation, filed charge sheet against the petitioners - A1 to A3 under Sections 406, 420, 506 read with 34 IPC. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 2nd respondent with an ill motive filed the complaint against them. The entire allegations were governed by the provisions of the Companies Act 1956. A National Company Law Tribunal was established with effect from 1-6-2016. All other proceedings were barred by law after amendment to the Companies Act 2013. The complainant with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce was committed on 31.10.2012 prior to the amendment of the Companies Act in the year 2013 and the provisions of Section 241 to 246 of Companies Act, 2013 had no prima facie application to the alleged offences as the said provisions were limited to prevention of oppression and mismanagement which were applicable when the business of the company was managed in a manner which was likely to cause serious injury or damage to the business or the companies affairs were conducted prejudicially to public interest or to the interest of the company, but not pertaining to appointing the persons as Directors of the company by submitting a forged document. Hence, this Court does not find any merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petiti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gistrar of Companies, which was a statutory record. They also collected the e-mail given by A3 to the complainant wherein he admitted that he acted upon the instructions of A1. Thus, there was prima facie evidence collected by the investigating officer to prove the offences against the petitioners under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. The statements of the witnesses recorded also would prima facie prove the other offences. The truth or otherwise of these allegations can be decided only after a full-fledged trial. This Court ordinarily would not embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether the accusations would be sustained or not. It was the function of the trial court. The inherent power under Section 482 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates