Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the provisions relating to investigation into the affairs of a company under the Companies Act, 1956 bar police investigation into allegations of cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code and whether the FIR deserved to be quashed.
Analysis: The statutory mechanism for investigation into company affairs under sections 235 to 242 of the Companies Act, 1956 is directed to corporate investigation and may lead to consequences such as prosecution under the Act, but it does not exclude the police power to investigate information disclosing a cognizable offence. The existence of a company-law remedy does not amount to an express or implied bar against recourse to the Code of Criminal Procedure where the allegations disclose offences under the IPC. Where the FIR is registered on court orders and the investigation is still at the stage of inquiry into alleged cognizable offences, the Court will not test the truth or evidentiary value of the allegations for the purpose of quashing.
Conclusion: The police investigation was held to be maintainable notwithstanding the company-law provisions, and the prayer for quashing of the FIR was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the complaint disclosed allegations of cognizable offences for which police investigation was legally open, and the Companies Act provisions did not foreclose that course.
Ratio Decidendi: Company-law provisions dealing with investigation into corporate affairs do not bar police investigation into suspected cognizable offences, and the existence of an alternative statutory mechanism is not by itself a ground to quash an FIR.