9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... holders, therefore, the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 are not applicable in the present case and this court is having jurisdiction to try the case registered by the police against the applicants for the offence punishable under Indian Penal Code. HELD THAT:- According to the notification dated 18.05.2016 in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section 1 of section 435 of Companies Act 2013 the Central Government after obtaining the concurrence of the respective of Chief Justices of the High Court designates the courts mentioned in the table as special court for the purpose of trial of offence punishable under the Companies Act, 2013 with imprisonment of 2 years or more in terms of section 435 of the Companies Act, 2013. As per Ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and no criminal trial has been initiated against the applicants for any of the offence which are punishable under the provision of Companies Act, therefore, in absence of the any offence punishable under the Companies Act, Special Court is not having jurisdiction to try the case which is punishable under the Indian Penal Code and court of Indore has territorial jurisdiction to try the case for the commission of offence punishable under Section under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. Therefore, this court is of the view that the trial court has not committed any error in rejecting the application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants - petition dismissed. - Hon'ble Judges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicant filed the aforesaid viz. appointment of applicant No. 2 as director and removal of complainant Mukesh as director on the website of Registrar of Companies. On the basis of aforesaid complaint FIR bearing crime No. 58/2015 was registered at police Station Juni Indore against the applicants for the offence under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial. 3. The applicants filed an application before the trial court under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. for their discharge on the ground that if the allegation made in the FIR and documents filed alongwith challan are taken into consideration they only disclose commission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the complainant Mukesh was Ex-director and shareholder of the company hence he was competent to make complaint as per provisions of Section 439(2) of Companies Act. The trial court has also not considered the fact that non calling of meeting, preparation of forged resignation are offences under the provisions of Act, 2013 and are covered by fraud under Section 447 of Act, 2013 and is punishable for an imprisonment which may extend to 10 years, therefore, according to the Section 439 as well as notification dated 18.05.2016 only the special court have competent to take cognizance of offence, therefore, the impugned order may be set aside and applicants be discharged from the charges under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and after detailed investigation as well as obtaining the report of the hand writing expert charge sheet has been filed by the police. It is further submitted that Section 435 of the Companies Act 2013 provides for establishment of Special Court to try offences punishable under the Companies Act with imprisonment of 2 years or more. Therefore, the jurisdiction of the Special Court is limited to the offences punishable under the Companies Act, 2013 and not under the Indian Penal Code or any offences committed under any other law. Thus, the trial court has not committed any error in rejecting the application filed by the applicant under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. Hence, learned counsel for the respondent prays for dismissal of the revision petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigation, police filed charge-sheet against the applicants before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Indore who committed the case to the Sessions Court, which was transferred to the 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Indore for the trial. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the applicant unable to point out that what act of the applicants alleged in the complaint violated the provisions of Companies Act and punishable under the said Act. In these circumstances the trial court has rightly held that applicants have fabricated and manipulated the records of the company to commit fraud and cheating against the complainant by showing resignation from the Board of Directors by forging the signatures by way of superimpos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
