CHANDUBHAI VIRJIBHAI GOKANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE common issue is involved in all the four matters and since they are heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) ALL these four criminal revision applications are filed by the petitioners-original accused against the judgment and order passed by the learned Presiding officer, Fast Track Court No. 1, Khambhaliya in Criminal Appeal Nos. 31, 12, 30 and 29 of 2002 dated 30-1-2008 whereby the learned Presiding Officer has confirmed the judgment and order of conviction dated 17-5-2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dwarka in Criminal Case Nos. 850, 180, 716 and 632 of 1994 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, has convicted the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sec. 630 of the companies Act, 1956 and imposed penalty of Rs. 500/- and further directing the petitioners to deposit the amount of fine, and in default, the petitioners shall have to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days. The learned presiding Officer, Fast Track Court has also directed that the petitioners shall hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the quarters allotted to them on or before 30-4-2008 and in default, the petitioners shall have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.

(3.) BARE facts are taken from Criminal Revision Application No. 311 of 2008. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent No. 2-Company through the power-of-attorney holder has filed a complaint against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sec. 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 claiming possession of the quarters from the petitioners and for imposing punishment as provided under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 630 of the Companies Act, 1956. It is stated in the said complaint that the petitioners were serving with the respondent no. 2-Company and since the petitioners were the employees of the respondent no. 2-Company, they were allotted residential premises owned and possessed by the respondent No. 2-Company at concessional rate and as per the rules the amount was to be deducted from the salary of the petitioners. It is also alleged in the complaint that the petitioners were serving in the respondent No. 2-Company and on their retirement, the respondent No. 2-Company informed them for vacating the premises in dispute. However, the petitioners have not vacated quarters and it is alleged that the petitioners have wrongfully withheld the possession of the quarters allotted to them. It is further alleged that the petitioners have committed an offence punishable under Sec. 630 (1) of the Companies Act, 1956, and therefore, the respondent No. 2-Company prayed for obtaining possession of the residential quarters allotted to them.