9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h some others established a company by name Harsha Leafin Commercial Ltd., which was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and a certificate of commencement of business was issued by the Registrar of Companies in the year 1996. The main objects of the company was to carry on the business of financiers, to receive money on deposit at interest or otherwise for fixed periods and to lend money on any terms that may be thought fit to any person, firm, company, etc. The petitioner was one of the directors of the said company. However, due to personal reasons, he tendered his resignation as director of the company and the same was accepted by the board of directors on 25-3-1999, and it was also incorporated in the Registrar of Companies in F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bitrary and illegal and therefore to quash the proceedings in Cr. No. 95 of 2004. 3. On behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 5, the Station House Officer, P.S. Kothagudem III-Town, Police Station, Khammam District, filed a counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner was the managing director of the finance company-M/s. Harsha Leafin Commercial Ltd. It is alleged that they induced the public by making wide publicity and collected lakhs of rupees by way of deposits, but failed to pay the amounts after the maturity period and wound up the company. In the circumstances basing on the complaints received from the depositors, a case was registered in Cr. No. 16 of 2004 and Cr. No. 95 of 2004 under sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the date of his retirement ( i.e., 25-3-1999), is not true. Hence, the writ petition is misconceived and that petitioner is very much liable along with the said company and its directors both jointly and severally for the repayment of the amounts to the deposit holders and for the alleged offences as narrated in the petition. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and the learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent. 7. At the outset, it is to be noted that the relief sought by the petitioner is two-fold. Firstly, he seeks a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 not to register any criminal case against him and secondly to quash the FIR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s received from the depositors. After all, recording of FIR is nothing but setting in motion of a criminal investigation and ultimately the charge-sheet will be filed only if the allegations are established after due investigation. 9. So far as quashing of the proceedings in FIR No. 95 of 2004 investigation is concerned, the law is well-settled that no investigation into a criminal proceeding can be quashed unless the allegations contained therein, even on their face value taken to be correct, make out no case. One of the grounds on which, a complaint may be quashed is where the proceedings are found to be maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
