9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... point of time. Therefore, the Company Law Board has passed an order directing the Company and its Directors to repay to the depositors by stipulating time limits and mode of payments to various depositors. This Court is of the view that the contention of the learned counsel cannot be countenanced. Whether or not the petitioner was incharge and responsible to the conduct of the business of the company or whether or not he has purposely resigned to avoid the directions of the Company Law Board is a matter of evidence. Therefore, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings. This Court holds that there is prima facie material to proceed against this petitioner also and the present Criminal Original Petition is liable to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion (4AAA) of Section 58B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, as amended by the Reserve Bank of India (Amendment Act), 1997. It was also directed that the company should file an affidavit of compliance with the order. 3. Though the order was passed on 01.12.1998, it appears that the directions given in the said order have not been complied with. Therefore, prosecution has been initiated for violating the order for punishment provided under sub-section (4AAA) of Section 58B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The present petitioner is arrayed as the 12th accused in the private complaint. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly submitted that at the time when the order was passed by the Company Law Board, the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, merely because one of the Directors was inducted later and resigned, the responsibility cannot be taken away. When the order of the Company Law Board itself indicates that all the Directors are responsible to comply with the order, all the Directors are liable to be prosecuted and hence, opposed for quashing the present proceedings. 5. As indicated above, the private complaint itself filed for violation of the orders of the Company Law Board passed on 01.12.1998. The order has been passed pursuant to the default committed by the Company in repaying the amount to various depositors totalling more than Rs.20 crores at the relevant point of time. Therefore, the Company Law Board has passed an order directing the Company and its Dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings. It is also relevant to note that similar stand has been taken by some of the co-accused wherein they pleaded discharge, which was dismissed by the trial Court and the revision filed against the said order in Crl.R.C.No.533 of 2011 has also been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.02.2017 holding that there are prima facie materials to proceed against the petitioners who are arrayed as Accused 2, 4 and 5 in the private complaint. 6. In such view of the matter, this Court holds that there is prima facie material to proceed against this petitioner also and the present Criminal Original Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
