Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 prosecutions for non-filing of annual returns and balance sheet and profit and loss account under Sections 159 and 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Section 162 were continuing offences, and whether the complaints filed in June 2011 were barred by limitation under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The default complained of was failure to conduct the annual general meeting and failure to file statutory returns and accounts within the prescribed time. The Court applied the distinction between a one-time omission and a continuing offence, holding that these defaults are complete once the due date expires and do not become fresh offences from day to day merely because the return or accounts remain unfiled. Since Section 162 of the Companies Act, 1956 prescribes only fine, the applicable period of limitation under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was six months. The complaints were instituted almost three years after the show cause notice dated 30.07.2008 and were therefore beyond limitation.
Conclusion: The offences under Sections 159 and 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 were not continuing offences for the purpose of limitation, and the complaints were time-barred. The petitions succeeded and the prosecutions were liable to be quashed.