2006 (9) TMI 292 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
11 revision petitions under section 397 Cr.P.C. filed by former employees of a company against judgments convicting them under section 630 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and directing them to vacate company premises.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners challenged the judgments convicting them under section 630 of the Act, claiming illegality and perversity in the findings. They argued that their services were not terminated following Industrial Disputes Act provisions and that section 630 applies only to officers and employees, not workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioners also raised objections on territorial jurisdiction citing relevant case laws.

2. The non-petitioners supported the judgments, highlighting a previous case with identical facts that was dismissed by the court, establishing a precedent. They argued that a Special Court with territorial jurisdiction over the state was established to try cases under the Act, rendering the territorial jurisdiction objection baseless. They differentiated the facts of cited cases from the present situation.

3. The court observed that the previous judgment on similar facts applies to the present cases, dismissing the revision petitions based on this precedent. It upheld the establishment of a Special Court with territorial jurisdiction, negating the objection raised by the petitioners. The court differentiated the facts of cited cases from the present scenario, emphasizing the applicability of section 630 to employees retaining company premises post-termination.

4. The court referred to various legal precedents, affirming that failure to vacate company premises post-termination constitutes an offense under section 630. It clarified that section 630 applies to both existing and terminated employees, with the question of termination propriety subject to civil or industrial adjudication. The court rejected the argument that the dispute was civil in nature, upholding the criminal complaint's validity.

5. In conclusion, the court found no error in the trial court's orders, upholding the judgments against the petitioners. It dismissed the revision petitions, emphasizing the applicability of section 630 to employees retaining company accommodations post-termination. The court's decision was based on legal precedents and the specific provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956.