Director protection from prosecution for filing defaults granted where a sick company could not comply until revival.

Relief under section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 was granted to protect directors from prosecution for non-compliance with filing obligations where the company had been declared sick under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, had ceased operations, and appellate proceedings against the winding-up order were pending. The court treated the company's inability to prepare and file accounts and records as a relevant circumstance and deferred criminal action until revival. No prosecution was to be launched against the directors under sections 210 and 220 until the company was revived, and the required records were to be filed within six months thereafter.

---

---

Issues: Whether relief under section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 should be granted to protect the directors from prosecution for non-compliance with sections 210 and 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the circumstances of a sick industrial company.

Analysis: The petition was founded on the company's declared sick status under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, its closure, and the pendency of appellate proceedings against the winding-up order. In these circumstances, the company was unable to prepare and file the required accounts and records. The Court considered it appropriate to grant time for compliance after revival, while protecting the directors from criminal action in the meantime.

Conclusion: Relief was granted. No prosecution was to be launched against the directors under sections 210 and 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 until the company was revived, and the necessary records were directed to be filed within six months thereafter.

---