VINU KUMAR R. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused No.1 in Crime No.727/2014, who is the accused No.2 in Crime Nos.287/2014, 45/2014, 977/2014, and 900/2013, came up to quash the Final Report submitted on the allegation of offences punishable under Sections 403,409,420 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Central Chitty Act 2012 in Crime No.727/2014 in Crl.M.C.3080/2020, Section 420 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 11 r/w Section 63 of Chit Funds Act, 1982 in Crime. No.287/2014 in Crl.M.C.3082/2020, and Crime No.45/2014 in Crl.M.C.3085/2020, Section 420 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 4 r/w Section 76 of Chit Funds Act,1982 in Crime No.977/2014 in Crl.M.C.3095/2020 and Sections 120B , 406 , 420 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Chits Act in Crime No.900/2013 in Crl.M.C.3224/2020. Admittedly he was one of the Director of the company. It is a limited Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act . Initially license was obtained for conducting a chitty. Under that guise subsequently 8 other chitties were conducted without the statutory license or permission, under the guise of the abovesaid limited company. It was submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the limited company itself was registered with the view to wriggle out of the personal liability and under that guise several chitties were conducted. It appear that the various chitties conducted under the guise of a limited company would stand vitiated and would attract the offence alleged. It is a matter to be adjudicated as it is a mixed question of fact and law. Hence it is not proper to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that a liberty to settle the matter between the parties be reserved as they are intending to settle it out of court. Without prejudice to the said right, all the Crl.MC's will stand dismissed.