Judgment Ashutosh Mohunta, J. 1. The present petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed for quashing the complaint (Annexure P8) under Section 614-A of the Companies Act, 1956 , and the summoning order dated September 19, 1994 (Annexure P9) passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. 2. Petitioner No. 1 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short `the Act) and the rest of the petitioners are its office-bearers. As per Section 220 of the Act, the Company is required to file before the Registrar of Companies (respondent) the balance-sheet and profit & loss account, which have already been laid at the annual general meeting, within 30 days. The petitioner-Company got its books of accounts, balance-sheet and the profit & loss account prepared and audited for the period April 1, 1991 to March 31, 1992 for the assessment year 1992-93. After the preparation of the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account, the Company held its annual general meeting for the financial year 1991-92 (assessment year 1992-93) on December 28, 1992 and as per the requirement of Section 220 of the Act, it filed the balance-sheet and profit & loss account along with the annual returns on January 19, 1993, before the Registrar of Companies. A photo copy of the receipt as a proof to the filing of the return is annexed as Annexure P1 with this petition. In spite of that the respondent filed a complaint under Section 220 of the Act before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, against the Company. The petitioners were summoned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate for April 16, 1994 for non-compliance of the provisions of the Act, and the petitioner-Company was fined for Rs. 1,000/-, despite of the fact that it was allegedly brought to the notice of the Chief Judicial Magistrate that compliance of Section 220 of the Act had already been done. In order to avoid unnecessary harassment, the petitioners paid the fine on April 16, 1994 itself. A copy of the receipt is at annexure P3. Subsequently, vide letter dated May 20, 1994 (Annexure P4), the Registrar of Companies was informed that the Company had already filed its balance-sheet on January 19, 1993, and a photo copy of the same was also sent along with the letter. A copy of the receipt is at annexure P3. Subsequently, vide letter dated May 20, 1994 (Annexure P4), the Registrar of Companies was informed that the Company had already filed its balance-sheet on January 19, 1993, and a photo copy of the same was also sent along with the letter. In spite of the information having been given to the Registrar of Companies, another notice dated August 25, 1994 (Annexure P5) was issued by him, to the effect that though the order dated April 16, 1994 had been passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, yet the Company had failed to file the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account for the year ending March 31, 1992 within two months of the date of order. The company was asked to file the same within 15 days of the receipt of notice. On receipt of this notice, the Company again wrote a letter dated September 2, 1994, once again informing the Registrar of Companies that the requisite balance-sheet and the profit and loss account had already been filed as back as January 19, 1993. However, again the balance- sheet as on March 31, 1992 and the annual return upto December 28, 1992 were filed. A copy of the letter written by the petitioner-Company is at Annexure P6. As it was sent by registered post, a copy of the postal receipt is at Annexure P7. In spite of all this, the respondent filed a complaint under Section 614-A of the Act against the petitioners in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. A copy of the complaint is at Annexure P8. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued the summoning order dated September 19, 1994 (Annexure P9) whereby he summoned the petitioners for October 28, 1994. 3. A written statement has been filed by the respondent wherein the main plea taken by the respondent is that the petitioners had failed to file a proper balance-sheet and profit and loss account. Otherwise, the fact of the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account submitted by the petitioner to the Registrar of Companies has not been denied. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case. 5. Otherwise, the fact of the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account submitted by the petitioner to the Registrar of Companies has not been denied. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case. 5. A look at the evidence on record would show that time and again the petitioners have failed the balance-sheet as well as the profit and loss account for the assessment year 1992-93. The main plea taken by the respondent is that the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account filed by the petitioner was not in proper form as the same was not accompanied by the audit report. In para 6 of the petition it has been stated by the petitioners that the Company had got the books of accounts, the balance-sheet as well as the profit and loss account audited by its Auditor Shri D. Vermani & Associates for the period 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1992 (Assessment year 1992-93). In the written statement this fact has not been disputed by the respondent. The reply to para No. 6 is only to the extent that "the contents of paragraph No. 6 need no reply being a matter of record". Any how, in case the documents submitted by the petitioner-Company were not in proper form or were not accompanied by the audit report, then it was incumbent upon the Registrar of Companies to point out the defect to the petitioner-Company itself instead of resorting to coercive method of filing a complaint in the Court and in this way unnecessarily harassing the petitioners. The respondent has failed to comply with the principles of natural justice. The filing of the complaint by the respondent is an abuse of the process of Court. 6. In the light of above, I allow the petition and quash the complaint (Annexure P8) and the summoning order dated September 19, 1994 (Annexure P9) passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar.