9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (9) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bed time and imposing a further fine of Rs. 100 on each of the accused for not submitting the return from June 30, 1975 till February 5, 1985 being the date of filing of the complaint and in default to pay the fine or to undergo simple imprisonment for a month. Criminal Revision Petition No. 51 of 1986 by the accused is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated December 30, 1985 passed by the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore District, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 95 of 1985 convicting the accused under rule 11 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 and sentencing each of the accused to pay a fine of Rs. 100 for not submitted the return within the prescribed time and imposing a further fine of Rs. 100 on each of the accused for not submitting the return from June 30, 1976 till February 5, 1985 being the date of filing of the complaint and in default to pay the fine or to undergo simply imprisonment for a month. Criminal Revision Petition No. 52 of 1986 by the accused is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated December 30, 1985 passed by the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore Dist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me and imposing a further fine of Rs. 100 on each of the accused for not sumitting the return from June 30,1980 till February 5, 1985 being the date of filing of the complaint and in default to pay the fine or to undergo simple imprisonment for a month. Criminal Revision Petition No. 56 of 1986 by the accused is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated December 30, 1985 passed by the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore District, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 100 of 1985 convicting the accused under rule 11 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 and sentencing each of the accused to pay a fine of Rs, 100 for not submitting the return within 'the prescribed time and imposing a further fine of Rs. 100 on each of the accused for not submitting the return from June 30, 1981 till February 5, 1985 being the date of filing of the complaint and in default to pay the fine or to undergo simple imprisonment for a month. All these cases have been filed for not filing the return on or before 30th June of every year. All the said cases are filed for not filing the return for the period from July 1, 1974 to June 30, 1975, for the period from J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fence is alleged to have been committed or within six months from the date on which the alleged commission of the offence came to the "knowledge of the inspector, whichever is later. The explanation to the section provides that if the offence in question is a continuing offence, the period of limitation shall be computed with reference to every point of time during which the said offence continues. The Supreme Court laid down in para 5 as under : "A continuing offence is one which is susceptible of continuance and is distinguishable from he one which is committed once and for all. It is on of those offences which arises out of a failure to obey or comply with a rule or its requirement and which involves a penalty, the liability for which continues until the rule or its requirement is obeyed or complied with. On every occasion that such disobedience or non-compliance occurs and recurs, there is the offence committed. The distinction between the two kinds of offences is between an act or omission which constitutes an offence once and for all and an act or omission which continues and, therefore, constitutes a fresh offence every time or occasion on which it continues. In the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State of MP. AIR 1984 SC 1688. Rule 10 in this case requires that every company to which the rules apply shall on or before the 30th day of June, of every year, file with the Registrar, a return in the form annexed to the rules and furnish the information contained the therein as on 31st day of March of that year duly certified by the auditor of the company. Therefore, the non-filing of the return or on as laid down by rule 10 before 30th June of every year shall be deemed to have been committed once for all. Once of the offence is committed under rule 10, it cannot be said the offence of non-filing of the return on or before june 30 of every year shall continue to be committed till the return is filed. The rule expects that the return should be filed on or before June 30, of every year. If the return is not filed on or before June 30 of every year, the offence contemplated by rule 10 is complete once for all and there is no question of continuity at all. The learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel, Shri Shivappa, tried to make a distinction between an omission to file a return and the commission of an offence of not filing a return. The distinction is without much su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not find much difference between the provisions of the Mines Act and the offence covered by rule 10 read with rule 11 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975. Section 468 of Criminal Procedure Code reads as : " 468. (1).Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this Code, no court shall take cognizance of an offence of the category specified in sub-section (2), after the expiry of the period of limitation. (2) The period of limitation shall be ( a ) six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only." (Rest not necessary) In these cases, the offence is punishable with fine only. There fore, the period of limitation is six months. The period of limitation as laid down by section 468, Criminal Procedure Code, would commence on the date of the offence. The date of offence in these cases is the one which falls on June 30 of every year. In these cases, the complaints have been filed after the expiry of six month. Therefore all the complaints are barred by limitation. Learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel Shri Shivappa, appearing for the Central Government submitted that if the company omits to file the return as contemplated by rule 10 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
