Search warrant for company records upheld where corporate documents were kept at company premises and self-incrimination was not compelled.

Section 627 of the Companies Act, 1956 did not displace the general search-warrant powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and a shareholder was not among the persons entitled to invoke that provision. A search warrant for company records could still be issued under sections 91 and 93 where the records were relevant to the prosecution and kept at the company premises. The Court also treated the warrant as consistent with article 20(3) because it sought corporate documents rather than compelled testimony or personal production by the accused. The impugned warrant was therefore sustained and the challenge to search and seizure failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether section 627 of the Companies Act, 1956 excluded recourse to the search-warrant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for obtaining company records in a prosecution relating to management of company affairs. (ii) Whether the impugned search warrant was sustainable under sections 91 and 93 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and whether it offended article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.

Issue (i): Whether section 627 of the Companies Act, 1956 excluded recourse to the search-warrant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for obtaining company records in a prosecution relating to management of company affairs.

Analysis: Section 627 of the Companies Act, 1956 permits an application only by the Public Prosecutor, the Central Government or a company prosecutor appointed under section 624A before a Judge of the High Court in chambers. A shareholder was not within the class of persons entitled to invoke that provision. The provision was therefore not available on the facts and did not operate as a substitute for the general powers under the Code. It also did not displace the operation of section 93 of the Code where the conditions for search and seizure were otherwise made out.

Conclusion: Section 627 did not bar the resort to the search-warrant provisions of the Code and the challenge on that ground failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned search warrant was sustainable under sections 91 and 93 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and whether it offended article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The warrant was directed at the registered office of the company for securing books and records relevant to the alleged offences. In the circumstances, the company premises were treated as the place where the relevant corporate records were kept, and the documents were not shown to be in the personal custody of the individual accused. A general search warrant could validly issue under section 93(1)(c) where the purpose of the proceedings would be served by search and seizure of the specified records. The safeguard against compelled self-incrimination was not violated because the search was directed to corporate records and did not require the accused to produce or testify. The warrant was therefore supportable on the facts even if the order had referred to section 93(1)(a).

Conclusion: The search warrant was valid and did not infringe article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.

Final Conclusion: The request to interfere with the search-warrant order was rejected, and the impugned warrant was left undisturbed while the seized records were to be retained in accordance with the directions issued.

Ratio Decidendi: A search warrant for corporate records may be sustained under section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the records are relevant to the prosecution and are kept in the company premises, and such search does not amount to compelled self-incrimination under article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.

---