Resignation of ex-director defeated prosecution where intimation to the Registrar was shown and Form No. 32 was treated as immaterial.

An ex-director's prosecution was quashed because the record showed he had resigned long before the company was wound up and had intimated the Registrar of Companies. The court treated the reported receipt of the resignation notice, the absence of any rejection of the resignation, and the lack of subsequent prosecution for company defaults as sufficient to show he was not liable for the alleged offences. Non-furnishing of Form No. 32 was held immaterial on these facts, and the applicant was discharged.

---

---

Issues: Whether the prosecution pending against the ex-director was liable to be quashed on the ground that he had resigned from the directorship long before the company was wound up and had intimated the Registrar of Companies.

Analysis: The resignation letter was stated to have been sent to the Registrar of Companies, and there was material showing that intimation of the resignation had been received in that office. The resignation was not rejected, and no prosecution was shown to have been launched against the applicant thereafter for defaults of the company. In these circumstances, the non-furnishing of Form No. 32 was treated as immaterial.

Conclusion: The application for quashing was allowed and the applicant was discharged in the prosecution.

---