9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oes by the name M/s.Krest Finlease Limited, has received several deposits from various persons and failed to repay the amount, pursuant to which orders have been passed by the Company Law Board on 01.12.1998 directing the directors at the relevant point of time and concerned officers to file an affidavit of undertaking to keep up the repayment schedule with a copy to the General Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Department of Non-Banking Supervision, Chennai. In paragraph 11 of the aforesaid order, the manner of repayment of all the deposits has been set out. In Paragraph 14, it is specifically ordered by the Company Law Board that the Company including the Directors of the Company shall be jointly and severally responsible for due compliance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the prosecution initiated against the petitioner is not maintainable. Therefore, for the mere non-compliance of the orders passed by the Company Law Board, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence punishable under sub-section (4AAA) of Section 58B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on an order passed by this Court dated 20.02.2017 in Crl.R.C.No.533 of 2011. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the very order of the Company Law Board makes it clear that any non-compliance or violation of the order will attract the penal provisions. Merely because a person has been inducted as a Director later and he also resigned from the Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noted that once the person is inducted as a Director, he not only takes the responsibility of the company, but also has the responsibility to honour the orders already staring at the company. When there is a direction to the company to refund all the deposits received by the company, the responsibility is equally on all the Directors to see that the orders of the Company Law Board is properly complied. Therefore, one cannot take advantage of mere resignation from the Directorship at the relevant point of time to contend that he was not responsible to the affairs of the Company. Therefore, at this stage, this Court is of the view that the contention of the learned counsel cannot be countenanced. Whether or not the petitioner was incharge and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
