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

Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2023 (6) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (6) TMI 855 - HC - Companies Law


Issues Involved:
1. Locus standi of the complainant to file the complaint.
2. Jurisdiction of Hare Street Police Station to register the FIR.
3. Validity of the allegations of forgery and criminal liability.
4. Applicability of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR.

Summary:

Issue 1: Locus Standi of the Complainant

The petitioner argued that the opposite party No. 2, Mr. Deepak Joshi, does not have the locus standi to file the complaint as he had resigned from the directorship of Palogix on 18th February 2023. The petitioner also claimed that Mr. Joshi had no authority to use the company's seal in the complaint. However, Mr. Joshi contended that he had not resigned and that his signature on the resignation letter was forged.

Issue 2: Jurisdiction of Hare Street Police Station

The petitioner argued that Hare Street Police Station had no jurisdiction to register the FIR as the registered office of Palogix is under the jurisdiction of Topsia Police Station. However, the FIR was registered at Hare Street Police Station on the basis that Godavari Commodities Limited, the majority shareholder, has its registered office within its jurisdiction.

Issue 3: Validity of Allegations of Forgery and Criminal Liability

The petitioner argued that the allegations of forgery are baseless and that the criminal proceeding should be quashed. However, the court noted that the allegations made in the FIR, such as forgery of Mr. Joshi's signature and unauthorized access to his email, prima facie constitute offences under Sections 468 and 471 of the IPC. The court emphasized that the investigation should proceed to verify these allegations.

Issue 4: Applicability of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to Quash the FIR

The court referred to the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and other cases, emphasizing that inherent powers under Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and only in rare cases. The court found that the allegations in the FIR were neither absurd nor inherently improbable and that there were sufficient grounds for proceeding with the investigation. Therefore, the court decided not to quash the FIR.

Conclusion:

In view of the above discussion, the court dismissed the revision petition, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. The court found no reason to interfere with the investigational process of the investigating agency in the instant case.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates