VIKRAM BAKSHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner impugns order dated 03.12.2009 whereby the Trial Court has taken cognizance under Sections 177/182/199/200/468/ 471/197/198 read with 628/283(2)A/630 of the Companies Act, on the criminal complaint filed by respondent Nos.2 & 3 as also the company M/s. Montreaux Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and summoned the petitioners.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that in the absence of a complaint in writing in terms of Sec. 195 Cr.P.C, the Trial Court could not have taken cognizance of the offences under Sec. 177/182 IPC. He further submits that in so far as other offences of forgery as well as filing and use of false documents is concerned, there was no material before the Trial Court in the form of report of an expert opining that the signatures of the complainant, respondent No. 2, Ms. Sonia Khosla were forged.

(3.) He further submits that the Trial Court had erred in holding that the signatures of the complainant, respondent No.2, Ms. Sonia Khosla on the two minutes of the meetings were forged, whereas there are no signatures of hers on the said minutes.