Judgment Manoranjan Prasad, J. 1. This revision application by the petitioners is directed against the judgment dated July 11, 1978, passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. 583 of 1977, confirming the judgment dated September 21, 1977, passed by Smt. Vidyut Prabha Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, in Case No. 518(2) of 1973/1227 of 1977, convicting the petitioners under Sec.162 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for contravention of the provisions of Sec.159 of the Act and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each or in the alternative to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 2. On May 30, 1973, the Registrar of Companies, Bihar, had filed a complaint petition in the court of the Sub-divisional Officer, Sadar, Patna against the petitioners out of whom petitioner No. 1 is M/s Calculating and Business Machines P. Ltd., a private company incorporated under the Act on November 1, 1966, having its registered office at Giddhour, District Monghyr and the rest of the petitioners are said to be the directors of the company. In the complaint petition, it was alleged that according to the provisions of Sec.159 of the Act, the company and its directors are under the statutory obligation to file with the Registrar of Companies, Bihar, an annual return in the prescribed form made up to the date of the annual general meeting of the company, for the financial year ending December 30, 1977, which should have been held latest on June 30, 1972, should have been filed with the Registrar of Companies on or before August 30, 1972. The petitioners, however, did not file the annual return made up to June 30, 1972, before the Registrar of Companies in spite of the service of notices as such they knowingly and wilfully continued to contravene the provisions of Sec.159 of the Act from August 30, 1972, onward, which is punishable under Sec.162 of the Act. 3. The petitioners, however, did not file the annual return made up to June 30, 1972, before the Registrar of Companies in spite of the service of notices as such they knowingly and wilfully continued to contravene the provisions of Sec.159 of the Act from August 30, 1972, onward, which is punishable under Sec.162 of the Act. 3. The defence of the petitioners was that the company had not been carrying on any business since its incorporation in 1966 and as such in pursuance of a resolution passed by the members of the company at an extraordinary general meeting the Registrar of Companies, Bihar, was requested in the companys letter dated May 28, 1969, to strike the name of the company off the Register under Section 560 of the Act, and it was in those circumstances that neither any annual general meeting of the company was held nor any annual return was filed with the Registrar of Companies and that there was no mens reason the part of the petitioners in not doing so. 4. The fact that the company in its letter dated May 21, 1969, had intimated the Registrar of Companies that the company had not been carrying on any business since its incorporation in 1966 and had requested the Registrar to strike the name of the company off the register under Sec. 560 of the Act was not disputed by the prosecution, but it was contended by the prosecution that in reply to the said letter dated May 28, 1969, of the company, the Registrar of Companies in his letter dated August 19, 1969, (Ex. A) had informed the company that its request for taking action under Sec. 560 of the Act could not be acceded to as the company had got some liability and, therefore, it should take steps to put the company into voluntary liquidation after following the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. The stand of the prosecution, therefore, was that since the Registrar of Companies had not acceded to the request of the company to strike its name off the Register under Section 560 of the Act, its liability to submit the annual return under Section 159 of the Act continued and the company having failed to do so it had become liable for penalty under Sec.162 of the Act. 5. 5. Sec. 560 of the Act empowers the Registrar of Companies to strike a defunct company off the Register where he has reasonable cause to believe that the company is not carrying on business or is not in operation, and there are certain procedures provided under the said section for the said purpose. In the letter dated May 28, 1969, the company had intimated the Registrar of Companies that the company had not been carrying on any business since its incorporation in 1966, and had requested the Registrar to strike the name of the company off the Register under Sec. 560 of the Act. In reply thereto the Registrar of Companies in his letter dated September 19, 1969, (Ex. A) had not, however, disputed the stand of the company that it had not been carrying on any business since its incorporation in 1966, which is the only ground under Sec. 560 of the Act for striking the name of a company off the Register, and he had declined to concede to the request of the company to strike its name off the Register on some other ground, namely, that the company had got some liability and had advised the company to take steps to put the company under voluntary liquidation after following the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case I am, therefore, of the opinion that these was no mens rea on the part of the petitioners in not submitting the annual return as required under Sec.159 of the Act and hence the conviction of the petitioners under Sec.162 of the Act and the sentence of fine imposed thereunder appear to be not warranted. 6. In the result, the application is allowed and the conviction and the sentence of fine imposed on the petitioners under Sec.162 of the Act for contravention of the provisions of Sec.159 of the Act are set aside.