9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suance of show cause notice. There is also no proof filed to show issuance of show cause notice and its service on the petitioners. If show cause notice had been given, petitioners would have got the opportunity for rectifying their defects. When that opportunity is not given, criminal prosecution is liable to be quashed. There is no specific averment made in the complaint as to whether the Directors are responsible for the offences alleged to have committed by the Company. No speaking order was passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at the time of taking cognizance of the cases. A reading of the complaint in these cases shows that it was specifically mentioned that show cause notice was issued on 13.08.2018/28.11.2017. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2019: E.O.C.C.No.429 of 2018 was filed under Section 137 (1) r/w Section 137 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The allegations made in the complaint is that a copy of the financial statement, consolidated financial statement, if any duly adopted for the year 2016-2017 should have been filed with the complainant within 30 days of the date of Annual General Meeting with such fees or additional fees as may be prescribed within the specified time. In this case, the copy of the financial statements have so far not been filed with the complainant despite issuance of the show cause notice dated 13.08.2018. Therefore, the accused is liable to be prosecuted for not complying with the provisions under Section 137 (1) r/w Section 137 (3) of the Compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancial statements for the year 2015-2016 ought to have been laid in the Annual General Meeting within the stipulated time on or before 30.09.2016 in accordance with Section 129(2) of the Act. In this case, the copy of the financial statements have so far not been filed despite issuance of the show cause notice dated 28.11.2017. Therefore, the accused is liable to be prosecuted for not complying with the provisions under Section 129(2) r/w 129(7) of the Companies Act, 2013. Crl.O.P.No.28739 of 2019: E.O.C.C.No.381 of 2018 was filed under Section 96(1) punishable under Section 99 of the Indian Companies Act, 2013. The Annual General Meeting ought to have been held for the financial year ending 31.03.2016 on or before 30.09.2016. The accused h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 on or before 30.09.2015. The accused have not conducted the Annual General Meeting for the financial year ending 31.03.2015, thus, violated the provisions under Section 96 (1) punishable under Section 99 of the Indian Companies Act, 2013. Crl.O.P.No.29584 of 2019: E.O.C.C.No.384 of 2018 was filed under Section 129(2) r/w 129(7) of the Companies Act, 2013. The allegations made in the complaint is that the copy of financial statements for the year 2014-2015 ought to have been laid in the Annual General Meeting within the stipulated time on or before 30.09.2015 in accordance with Section 129 (2) of the Act. In this case, the copy of the financial statements have so far not been filed despite issuance of the show cause notice dated 28.11.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show issuance of show cause notice and its service on the petitioners. If show cause notice had been given, petitioners would have got the opportunity for rectifying their defects. When that opportunity is not given, criminal prosecution is liable to be quashed. There is no specific averment made in the complaint as to whether the Directors are responsible for the offences alleged to have committed by the Company. No speaking order was passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at the time of taking cognizance of the cases. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for quashing the proceedings. 4.In response, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that it is not mandatory to issue a statutory notice, howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upport of his submissions. These writ petitions have been filed for a limited relief seeking directions to the second respondent to consider their reply dated 03.01.2019 and pass necessary orders. It is seen from this order that for the notice issued by the respondent, a reply was sent and the petitioners wanted the reply to be considered before proceeding further. In the case before hand, the very allegations made in the complaint is that no show cause notice was sent at all, but the complaint shows that show cause notice was sent. Sending of show cause notice, its acceptance are disputed facts, this can be decided only during trial. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this judgment is not applicable to the facts of this case. Thus, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
