STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BEAS INVESTMENT PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the Appellant against the judgment and order dated 6-10-1980 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 170/80 whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the Respondents accused of the offences punishable under Sec. 383 of the Companies Act.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that the accused No. 1 is a Company registered under the Companies Act and accused Nos. 2 to 4 are its Directors paid up Capital of the Company is over 55 lakhs. It is the case of the prosecution that Accused No. 4 (Respondent No; 4) who is appointed Company Secretary on 5-3-1975 of Accused No. 1 Company was also working as a Company Secretary in another company namely M/s. Sarabhai Ltd. and thereby, Respondents accused have committed an offence punishable under Section 383 (A) of the Companies Act Further the Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 have also committed an offence under Sec. 383 of the Companies Act since they were knowing that the respondent no. 4 accused was serving as a Company Secretary in M/s. Sarabhai Ltd. they allowed the Respondent no. 4 accused to work as Company , Secretary O" Accused No. 1 Company. Thus complaint was filed against the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 383 of the Companies Act. Said complaint was registered as Criminal Case No. 170/80. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, after appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties, came to the conclusion that no offence is proved against the respondents and consequently, acquitted the respondents of the offence with which they were charged. The State has filed appeal against the said judgment and order of acquittal.

(3.) I have gone through the entire evidence on record. I have also gone through the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. First of all, it would be relevant to refer to Section 383(A) of the Companies Act, which reads as follows: Section 383 (A): Certain Companies, to have Secretaries: