Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 751 (GUJ)

Rasiklal S. Mardia v. State of Gujarat

2011-11-16

M.R.SHAH

body2011
Judgment M.R. Shah, J.—The present Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner - original accused to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No. 153 of 2005 pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 58-A (10) and 58-AAA of the Companies Act, 1956 (“the Act” for short). 2. It appears that the impugned complaint was filed by the Respondent No. 2 – original complainant – Registrar of Companies against the petitioner herein alleging inter-alia that the order passed by the Company Law Board dated 07.05.2003 passed under Section 58-A of the Act to make repayment of all the matured deposits, as stated in the said order, has not been complied with. 3. It appears and it is reported that during the pendency of the present proceedings, whatever amount was required to be paid under the order passed by the Company Law Board, has already been paid, more particularly to The Army Group Insurance Fund and order passed by the Company Law Board of breach alleged have been complied with. Therefore, it is requested to permit the petitioner to compound the offence as alleged. It is submitted that the offence alleged is compoundable offence. Mrs. Pahwa, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has requested to permit the petitioner to compound the offence by further submitting that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the costs which may be determined by this Court while permitting the petitioner to compound the offence. 4. Mr. K.T. Dave, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 – original complainant – Registrar of Companies has submitted that as such at the relevant time, when the complaint was filed, there was a breach committed by the petitioner and order passed by the Company Law Board was not complied with and, therefore, it is requested to comply with the same, however, he is not in a position to dispute that how the offence alleged is not compoundable. 5. 5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the fact that during the pednecy of the proceedings, the order passed by the Company Law Board of which the breach was alleged, has been complied with and the entire amount due and payable under the order passed by the Company Law Board dated 07/05/2003 is reported to have been complied with and even considering the Certificate issued by the Assistant Director, AGI (EMI), dated 5/9/2007 to the effect that they have received the entire amount and no amount is outstanding and that they have no objection to withdraw the complaint in question and considering the fact that offence alleged is compoundable, the present petition can be disposed of by permitting the petitioner to compound the offence on imposing reasonable cost, which is quantified at Rs. 25,000/- which the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner is agreed to deposit. In the facts and circumstances of the case this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and permit the petitioner to compound the offence in question. 6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is allowed by permitting the petitioner to compound the offence in question being Criminal Case No. 153 of 2005 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with the registry of this Court within four weeks from today and on such deposit, the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No. 153 of 2005 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad stands disposed of so far as the petitioner herein is concerned. On deposit of the aforesaid cost of Rs. 25,000/-, Registry is directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- to the original complainant – Respondent No. 2 herein – Registrar of Companies by Account Payee Cheque, and the said Cheque be given to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. Registry to transmit the balance amount of Rs.10,000/- to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. If the aforesaid amount of cost of Rs. 15,000/- to the original complainant – Respondent No. 2 herein – Registrar of Companies by Account Payee Cheque, and the said Cheque be given to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. Registry to transmit the balance amount of Rs.10,000/- to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. If the aforesaid amount of cost of Rs. 25,000/- is not deposited by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today, as stated hereinabove, the impugned complaint against the petitioner herein shall stand continued and in that case, the learned trial court to proceed further with the trial in accordance with law and on merits. Rule is made to the aforesaid extent.