9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mukesh and Radheshyam Mandwani have given a written complaint to the police alleging that they and applicant Sunil are Director of the M/s. Santosh Devkan Private Limited. The said company is having immovable property at Indore. The rate of the aforesaid property has been is increased, therefore applicant Sunil tried to grab the aforesaid property of company. It is also alleged that the applicant is not calling the meeting of company and have kept the agenda book and resolution book of the company in his possession with a view to gain control over the company. He without calling any meeting of the board of Director of company prepared forge resignation letter of complainant Mukesh as well as Radheshyam and accepted their resignation on 15. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oresaid court is competent to try the case registered against the applicants. Hence, they may be discharged for the offence registered against them. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the trial court rejected the application filed by the applicants holding that under the provisions of Companies Act cognizance of matter can only be taken if complaint is made by Registrar of Companies or shareholders, therefore, the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 are not applicable in the present case and this court is having jurisdiction to try the case registered by the police against the applicants for the offence punishable under Indian Penal Code. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that according to the Section 436(2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntrol over the assets of the company and to deceive betray and cheat the complainant, which is clearly offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 201 read with Section 120-B of the I.P.C. After removing the complainant on the basis of false, forged and fabricated resignation letter, the applicant No. 1 also appointed his brother applicant No. 2 Ashok Mandwani as one of the directors in the company to fulfill the requirement of minimum two directors in the company however, no such decision can be taken by the company unless the Board of Directors in their meeting has taken such decision and no board meeting can pass any resolution unless quorum is present. Thus, applicants committed fraud and cheating with the compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13. As per Serial No. 6 of the table IX Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior has been designated as Special Judge for the State of Madhya Pradesh to try the offences punishable under the Companies Act, 2013. Provision of Section 436(2) also provide that while trying an offence under the Companies Act, a Special Court may also try an offence other than an offence under this Act with which the accused may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 be charged at the same trial. This provisions reads more scope of doubt that for special court who have jurisdiction, its a precondition that an offence punishable under the Companies Act, 2013 must be alleged or committed. However, in the present case, no offence under the Companies Act has been regi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
