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

TMI Blog

Home

1995 (12) TMI 272

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he petitioners has raised three contentions: the first contention is that the taking of cognizance of the offence is barred by limitation prescribed under section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 ('the Code'); the other contentions are that all the offenders liable for the offence are not arrayed as accused in the case; therefore, the prosecution is vitiated; and that the clubbing of offences arising out of two financial years is unlawful. I will take up the first contention which is a pre-condition for taking cognizance of the offence. It is contended that the offence under subsection (1) of section 371 being punishable for a term of imprisonment of six months, the period of limitation for taking cognizance of the offence unde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... milarly, for the year ended 31 -3-1992 the balance sheet was submitted to the 1st respondent on 19-8-1992. The Deputy Director (Inspection) Madras, conducted the inspection of the petitioners' company between 10-3-1993 and 22-3-1993. After conducting inspection a show-cause notice dated 27-4-1993 was issued alleging that the petitioner had contravened the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 370, inasmuch as the petitioner had made inter-corporate deposits of certain companies, in excess of the limits prescribed. The petitioner sent a reply dated 24-5-1993 justifying the deposits and denying the offence complained of. Thereafter, the petitioner had not heard anything from the Deputy Director (Inspection). However, by notice dated 5-7-19 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... st day on which such offence comes to the knowledge of such person or to any police officer, whichever is earlier; or" Shri Innayya Reddy contends that the complainant came to know about the offence committed by the petitioners only on the letter received from the office of the Regional Director, Department of Economic Affairs, dated 15-6-1994 and therefore he can file a complaint within one year from that date. In fact, this is the allegation made in the complaint as well as the averment in the counter-affidavit of the 1st respondent. It is seen from the above that the petitioners have admittedly filed balance sheets before the complainant on 21-8-1991 and 19-8-1992 respectively with regard to the two relevant financial years. The 1st re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lead to serious negligence on the part of the prosecuting agencies and unnecessary mental anguish to the person accused. The criminal system is supposed to be fair to the prosecution as well as to the accused. In the conspectus of the facts present in the case, which are not in dispute, the complaint is clearly barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed. 6. I can draw support to strengthen my view, from the decision of Madras High Court in Asstt. Registrar of Companies v. H.C. Kothari [l993] 10 CLA 80, where it was observed that: "The Registrar of Companies is deemed to have knowledge of the contents of exhibits PI to P3 and of the offenceon the day when they are received by him. After receiving the balance-sheets, it is no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd also to prevent abuse of the process of the court by filing vexatious and belated prosecutions long after the date of the offence. The object which the statutes seek to subserve is clearly in consonance with the concept of fairness of trial as enshrined in article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance that any prosecution, whether by the State or a private complainant, must abide by the letter of the law or take the risk of the prosecution failing on the ground of limitation...." (p. 1054) 7. In the light of the clear proposition of law that the 'private complainant must abide by the letter of the law or take the risk of the prosecution failing on the ground of limitation' and in view of my findi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates