9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er was only registered as a Director and no filing as a Key Managerial Personnel was done within 30 days of such appointment. Therefore, he has never been shown as a Key Managerial Personnel of M/s.Surana Corporation Limited in such Register. It is also submitted that all the other accused persons have released on bail except the founders of the company. The petitioner herein is a Chartered Accountant by profession and he had done his duty as a Chartered Accountant, without involving himself in any of the physical activities alleged against the company.
Conclusion - The petitioner, despite not being a Key Managerial Personnel officially, was involved in the financial affairs of the companies and could be held liable under Section 447 for fraudulent activities.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner from the date of arrest i.e on 05.08.2022, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions - bail application allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he process and activity connected to the siphoning of funds borrowed from banks and had committed fraud as defined under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. 3. Mr.V.Karthick, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as an Additional Director of one of the companies vide Board Resolution dated 03-07-2015 and subsequently he was confirmed as a Non-Executive Director of Surana Corporation Limited. As a Non-Executive Director, the petitioner had no role in the day to day affairs of the company and no remuneration was paid to him and he was paid salary only from Surana Industries Limited. In fact, he had resigned from the Board in the month of July, 2017 and the same was duly communicated to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs through FORM DIR-11 & 12. The alleged irregularities committed by the company if any, was either before the petitioner joined the Board or after his resignation. Therefore, the petitioner had no role to play whatsoever the affairs of Surana Corporation Limited. The alleged write off of 674 Kgs of gold wastage by Surana Corporation Limited in the Financial Year 2014-2015, when the petitioner was not even appointed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has nothing to prove with the allegations as alleged by the prosecution. Since he was working as a Non-Executive Director, he was not aware of the day-to-day affairs of the company and he had only verified the accounts based on the documents submitted by the persons who were managing the affairs of the company. However, he would furthermore submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a reasonable amount as directed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 7. Mr.B.Mohan, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for SFIA would submit that the petitioner has been associated with Surana GOC since Financial Year 2010-11 onwards. The petitioner was appointed and functioned as in-charge of accounts of Surana Corporation Limited from Financial Year 2010-11 onwards. He being a qualified chartered accountant had functioned as Assistant Vice President(Accounts & Finance) between 2010-11 to 2011-12 and as Vice President (Accounts & Finance) between 2012-13 to 2013-14. Further he became a Director of Surana Corporation Limited from 07.03.2015 onwards and had continued in the post till 09.10.2017. He has also functioned as Group Chief Accounts Officer o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d a false representation was made by the petitioner before banks during Corporate Debt Restructuring of Surana Corporation Limited on the recoverability of debt due to the said company from Puppet entities controlled by Surana GOC, knowing fully well of the non-recoverability of the amounts from such puppet companies. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the bail petition. 10. This Court is of the considered view the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the write-off gold as wastage was in the Financial Year 2014-15 which is before the petitioner's term of directorship, while the fact is that the gold write-off was over a period of three years i.e. Financial Year 2014-15 to Financial Year 2016-17. The petitioner was in-charge of finance and accounts from the year 2011 onwards. As per Section 447 of Companies Act, 2013, the fraud in relation to affairs of a company committed by any person or any other person with connivance in any manner, as such it does not require a person to be director alone to be charged under the Section, rather Section 447 of Companies Act applies to any person who is a party to the fraud. Further, the petitioner in the capa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
