9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 447 of the Companies Act, 2013 makes it clear that the prosecution is to relate to the companies in the first instance and also to other persons who have in any manner connived in commission of the offence to gain undue advantage. A bare perusal of Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013 reveals that there is no bar of limitation to proceed under Sections 212 or 447 of the Companies Act, 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of 24th January, 2019 summons petitioner for commission of offence under Sections 418/120B of IPC and under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. Learned senior counsel for petitioner submits that the only allegation leveled against petitioner, as noticed in the impugned order, is that petitioner who is arrayed as A-27 with his co-accused A-24, A-25 & A-26, were partners in the mining fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he investigation into the affairs of the company, and not in respect of any private individual. It is also pointed out that vide order of 23rd / 24th February, 2016, Central Government has confined the investigation qua 104 companies and not against any private individual and the investigation has been carried out beyond the time stipulated by the Central Government in the aforesaid communication. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o summon petitioner and in any case, petitioner has efficacious remedy to raise the pleas taken herein before the trial court at the charge stage. It is next submitted that at the summoning stage, indepth examination of the case is not required to be undertaken. Learned Standing counsel for respondent submits that sanction for prosecution of petitioner has been granted after satisfying that a prim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required to be undertaken. Upon doing so, I find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. This Court finds that the trial court has jurisdiction to proceed against petitioner, as sanction for the prosecution has already been taken. In the considered opinion of this Court, trial court does not lack the jurisdiction to proceed against petitioner. Finding no illegality and infirmity in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
