Continuing offence doctrine in company filings: a late accounts default is complete on expiry, not extended by daily penalty.

Failure to file the balance sheet and profit and loss account within the statutory time was held not to be a continuing contravention. The obligation under the Companies Act was complete on expiry of the filing period, and the presence of a penal provision measuring fine by the period of default did not by itself convert the omission into a continuing offence. A continuing offence arises only where the statute expressly or by necessary implication creates an ongoing duty. On that basis, section 472 CrPC did not apply, limitation under section 468 CrPC was not extended, and the complaint was treated as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the failure to file the balance-sheet and profit and loss account under section 220(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, read with section 220(3), is a continuing contravention so as to attract section 472 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and save the complaint from limitation under section 468 of that Code.

Analysis: The obligation under section 220(1) required filing of the prescribed accounts within the stipulated time. The penal provision in section 162(1) prescribed a fine quantified by reference to the period of default, but that by itself did not transform the initial omission into a continuing offence. The distinction between a completed default and a continuing wrong depends on the language of the statute, the nature of the duty, and whether the obligation is one that continues from day to day. Here, the omission was complete on the expiry of the statutory period for filing. The provision did not create a continuing duty to keep filing until compliance, nor did it contain express language making the offence continuing. The use of a daily fine only measured the penalty and was intended to secure strict compliance, not to extend limitation indefinitely.

Conclusion: The contravention was not a continuing contravention. The complaint was time-barred, cognizance was unlawful, and the conviction and sentence could not stand.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory default is not a continuing offence merely because the penal provision provides a daily fine; it is continuing only where the statute, by express language or necessary implication, makes the obligation itself continuous.

---