9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (3) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either ( a ) wrongfully obtains possession of any property, or ( b ) having obtained such property during the course of his employment, withholds the same after the termination of his employment. The Calcutta High Court disagreed with the view and held that it refers only to existing officers and employees of a company. It also held that the words "any such property" in section 630(1)( b ) relates to property specified in clause ( a ), i.e. , property of the company wrongfully taken possession of by a present officer or employee of the company. The Supreme Court in the case of Baldev Krishna Sahi v. Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. [1988] 63 Comp. Cas. 1 ; AIR 1987 SC 2245, disagreed with the view of the Calcutta High Court. The q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de in the aforesaid cottage. Even after the said Iqbal Ansari resigned, the flat was not handed over to the second respondent company. Since the petitioner and the other co-accused failed and neglected to hand over possession of the said cottage, on March 17, 1988, the second respondent filed the present complaint alleging offences under sections 406, 408, Indian Penal Code, and section 630 of the Companies Act. The second respondent impleaded accused Nos. 1 to 3, the sons of late Aziz A. Ansari, and accused No. 4, his widow. On March 17, 1988, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, Bombay, issued process against the accused under section 447, Indian Penal Code, and under section 630 of the Companies Act. Taking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded that there was a bona fide civil dispute pending in Suit No. 3491 of 1988, filed by the accused and it would be in the interest of justice that the present prosecution be stayed pending the disposal of the said suit. In my judgment, there is no merit in any of the aforesaid contentions. It has to be noticed that section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, is not a pure penal provision prescribing punishment. It is a quasi-criminal proceeding. It is apparent that the object of the provision is to provide for speedy recovery of the property of the company. It is common knowledge that both in the public as well as in the private sector, companies are required to provide residential accommodation to their officers and employees as a conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eirs and legal representatives of the officer or employee in whose charge the property of the company has been left by the deceased employee. In my judgment, on a proper construction of the said provision, the said heirs and legal representatives would be included in the term "officer or employee of a company". An employee who is allotted a residential accommodation by the company does not occupy it alone, but occupies it along with the members of his family. If section 630 obliges an officer or an employee to return the property of the company, I see no reason why after his death, his heirs and legal representatives who continue to be in possession of the property of the company by virtue of they being the heirs and legal representatives o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 988] 64 Comp. Cas. 117 ; [1987] 3 Comp LJ 246. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the aforesaid case held that the provision embodied in section 630 do not contemplate criminal proceedings against relatives of an erstwhile director. Consequent upon the said finding, the High Court in its inherent power under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, dropped the criminal prosecution lodged against the relatives of the erstwhile directors. I have considered the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case, but have been unable to persuade myself to concur with the view expressed. Section 630 has to be interpreted in a manner as not to defeat the very purpose and object for which it is enacted. Persons found aiding and abetting the offence under the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... garding the pendency of a bona fide civil dispute in Civil Suit No. 3491 of 1988, pending in the Court of Small Causes. It has to be observed that this suit has been filed after the filing of the present complaint. It is now well-established that a criminal complaint once lodged should be expeditiously disposed of and the same can be stayed only if the special facts and circumstances of the case so warrant. I do not find any special facts or circumstances in the present case to stay the present criminal prosecution pending the suit. It is well-known that civil suits take years before decisions are given. To stay the present complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act would be to defeat the very object of the said provision. It may be t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
