ARAVIND BABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions are filed under S.482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing a complaint filed by the second respondent - Regional Drugs Inspector before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam (now pending as C.C. No. 1245/1998). Crl.M.C.No. 1637/1999 is filed by the sixth accused who is stated to be one of the Directors of a Private Limited Company. Crl.M.C. No. 729/1999 is filed by accused Nos. 11 and 12 who are also stated to be Directors of the same company.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of the cases are as follows:

(3.) It is argued by the counsel for the petitioners that there is absolutely no averment in the complaint that the petitioner in these Crl.M.Cs., are in charge or control of the business of the fourth accused company. It is argued that they were arrayed as accused in the case solely on the ground that the Registrar of Companies had issued a list to the second respondent which contains their names also as the Directors of the company. It is also argued that there was dispute between the 4th respondent company represented by the second accused who was the Managing Director and the petitioners and some of the Directors filed civil cases against the company and the Managing Director. In Crl.M.C. No. 729/99, it is averred that the petitioners along with two others filed O. S. No. 723/92 before the Sub Court, Ernakulam. It is also averred that the 5th accused and some others were removed and new Board of Directors were elected on 6.1.1992, but they were not allowed to function. The newly elected Chairman along with another Director filed O. S. No. 41/93 against the 5th accused and both suits were tried jointly. According to the petitioners in Crl.M.C. No. 729/99, they were prevented from functioning as the Directors of the 4th accused company and taking part the day to day affairs of the company. Petitioners in Crl.M.C. No. 729/1999 have produced a copy of the common judgment passed by this Court in A. S. Nos. 480, 489, 497, 498, 668, 688, 689, 706, 756 and 757 of 1994 dated 10.12.1998. It is admitted by the petitioners that the judgment in A. S. No. 480 of 1994 and connected appeals of this Court has not become final and the hospital is being managed by the receivers appointed by this Court. I do not think that it is necessary to consider the effect of the decrees passed in the civil suits to decide these two criminal M.Cs.