9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e., Each investor would be allotted a certain sq.yard of land consisting of Mangium wood trees. The 1st petitioner company had invested the amount in the interest bearing deposit and after maturity, the investor would be repaid either by registration of lands or repayment of cash. 2. The petitioner company was incorporated in December 1996 under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner company, by its letter dated 14-2-2000 to its Unit Holders, informed that SEBI (Collective Investment Scheme) Regulations, 1999, came into force on October 15, 1999 requiring either Certification of Registration from SEBI to continue with the existing schemes or winding up of the schemes. It is stated that one of the conditions to be fulfilled in order to con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have to repay the amount to the investors. 4. The respondent/Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) filed a private complaint under section 200 Cr.PC., before the XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, seeking to take action against the company and its Directors for non compliance of the directions of SEBI and for the offence under section 24(1) of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. 5. Subsequently, in view of the amendment to section 24 of SEBI Regulations, the punishment for the offence has been substituted for one year, or with fine, or with both by the SEBI (Amendment) Act, 2002, w.e.f. 29-10-2002 and it reads as follows:- "24. (1) Without prejudice to any award of penalty by the adjudicating officer under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iling the complaint before the respondent, even during the year 2005, they settled the investors and there was some difficulties in tracing out the investors and therefore, they could not comply with the directions of the SEBI before December 2000. They have subsequently settled the matter and therefore, they filed a memo with affidavit before the Sessions Judge, to compound the matter. Since there is a bonafide reason for compounding the offence and that they settled and repaid all the amounts, it is submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that in such circumstances, the petitioners need not undergo the ordeal of trial which will be only a futile exercise. In order to show bonafide of the petitioners, they also filed Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndicating any act or omission at Chennai which may amount to offence, is not factually correct and accordingly set aside the impugned order and restored the complaint filed before the Court of XXIII, Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai. 11. The learned Standing counsel submits that the above referred to decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Since the facts are similar and that in the present case on hand, the accused being a company in Andhra Pradesh and all the investors also in Andhra Pradesh, no cause of action arisen in Chennai, but the Regional Office of the complaint/Securities and Exchange Board of India, is in Chennai and therefore, filed complaint. In view of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15, 1999, requiring either Certification of Registration from SEBI to continue with the existing schemes or winding up of the schemes. One of the conditions to be fulfilled in order to continue with the scheme is "the applicant shall meet the minimum net worth of Rupees one crore within one year from the date of grant of provisional registration which shall be increased by Rupees one crore each within two years, three years, four years and five years from the date of grant of provisional registration", otherwise, they have to settle the amount. The petitioners company could not raise the above said investment and the amount in the scheme was not more than the limit fixed by the SEBI Regulations and therefore, they wanted to inform its Unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereafter the matter has been settled or not and whether the offence is compoundable or not are the questions to be decided in the trial by putting forth evidence. Under these circumstances, this court did not find any ground to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, this Crl.O.P., is liable to be dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioners to take all their defence before the trial court. 19. However, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners would further submit that the matter is already settled and the petitioners filed a memo and affidavit to compound the offence before Additional Judge XIX City Civil Court, Chennai, and so far, the learned Judge has not passed any order in the said memo. 20. It is further informed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
