9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (4) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Companies Act, 1956 ( the Act ). The second appellant who is the wife of the first appellant was also a director of the said company. The appellants were using a car allegedly belonging to the second respondent herein. They resigned from the directorship but refused to return the car in spite of repeated demands. A complaint under sections 406, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was filed. 3. The contention of the appellants is that having regard to the fact that at best they have committed an offence under section 630 of the Act, the impugned first information report should be quashed. Strong reliance in this connection has been placed on G. Kandaram v. Sunder Chikha Amin [2000] 2 ALT 448 (FB) and Mahavir Prasha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eliver up or refund, within a time to be fixed by the court, any such property wrongfully obtained or wrongfully withheld or knowingly misapplied, or in default, to suffer imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years. ****** 634. Enforcement of orders of courts. Any order made by a court under this Act may be enforced in the same manner as a decree made by the court in a suit pending therein." 6. A bare perusal of the allegations made in the first information report would clearly show that it is not a case where the appellants have only been charged for not returning the properties of the company, but also have been accused of snatching rubber stamps and letter head pad of the company forcibly so as to transfer the vehicl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing the FIRs. 13. Unless the investigation is completed, it cannot be presumed that the complaint does not make out offences under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code or that the alleged offence falls under section 405 of the Indian Penal Code only and that prosecution is barred by limitation under sections 468 and 469 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It would be wholly improper to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 even before the investigation is completed and decide these partly legal and partly factual questions." 10. In Mahavir Prashad Gupta s case ( supra ), the Apex Court, upon taking into consideration a large number of decisions, observed : "Mr. Chidambaram also relied on the case of Hridaya Ranjan Prasad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ercised : 102(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a magistrate within the purview of section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
