DHARMENDRA KR. LILA Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of criminal complaint No. 805/2002 under Section 62 read with Section 68 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed by Registrar of Companies against them. This complaint is pending in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Delhi. It was alleged in the complaint that the petitioners were signatories to the prospectus dated 28th April, 1994 containing misstatement of facts. The company had collected (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to if the vernacular matter is required.) 210 lakhs from the public issue but had failed to accomplish the promises made in the prospectus.

(2.) Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has contended that no criminal complaint can be filed under Section 62 of the Act as this provision deals with the 'civil liability' for making misstatement in the prospectus. With regard to the complaint under Section 68 of the Act, it has been submitted that for filing of a complaint under this section, prior sanction of competent authority was required. Neither such sanction was obtained by the Registrar of Companies prior to filing of the complaint nor had the same been placed on record. In nutshell, it has been canvassed that the complaint under Section 62 read with Section 68 of the Act was liable to be quashed. Reliance has also been placed on Rajeev Shukla and Anr. v. Registrar of Companies, 2006 135 DLT 599and Manju Yadav v. Registrar of Companies, 2007 98 DRJ 312.

(3.) Section 62 of the Act reads as under: