VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition under sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereafter referred to as "the Code"), has been preferred by the petitioners accused (hereafter referred to as "the petitioners") against the order dated May 25, 2002, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, in Criminal Case No. 403 of 1999 whereby notice of accusation under Section 146/628 of the Companies Act has been ordered to be put to the petitioners.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the presentation of this petition are that the complainant/respondent No. 1 (hereafter referred to as "the complainant") filed a complaint against the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 under sections 146 and 628 of the Companies Act, 1956. The case of the complainant as made out in the complaint is that as per the particulars filed with the office of the complainant respondent No. 2 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act having its registered office at Wood Land House, New Land Estate, Circular Road, Shimla, and respondent No, 3 is its managing director and the petitioners are the directors. It is statutory obligation of the company and its directors to inform the complainant about the situation of its registered office and any change therein by filing Form No. 18 in the office of the complainant. As per the said form filed by the respondent company on July 10, 1991, the situation of its office is given as "Wood Land House, New Land Estate, Circular Road, Shimla". However, on an inspection undertaken by the Assistant Registrar of Companies, it was found that at the address so given, there was no registered office of the respondent company. Therefore, the company and its directors have contravened Section 146 of the said Act and rendered themselves liable for punishment under Section 146(4) of the said Act and they are further liable for being punished for the commission of an offence under Section 628 of the said Act for giving the aforesaid false information in Form 18. On the basis of the said complaint the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, took cognizance and summoned the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and after hearing the parties passed the impugned order and put accusations to the petitioners and respondent No. 3.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Central Government standing counsel for the complainant and learned counsel for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and have also perused the records.