Right to Prosecute: administrative regulations do not bar Assistant Registrars or citizens from filing valid complaints under the Act.

Whether a complaint by an Assistant Registrar, absent a complaint by the District Magistrate as contemplated by the Regulations under Section 248(2), can support prosecution was examined: the Regulations allocate investigatory and prosecutorial duties and direct officials to seek State Counsel or District Magistrate action, but contain no statutory bar preventing other persons from filing complaints. The legal effect declared is that administrative regulations do not oust the general right of private or official complaint where no statutory restriction exists; accordingly, an Assistant Registrar's complaint is valid and procedural acquittal for lack of a District Magistrate complaint is not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether a complaint filed by the Assistant Registrar under the Indian Companies Act, without a complaint by or at the instance of the District Magistrate as contemplated by Regulation 14(b), is a valid complaint to support prosecution for offences under the Indian Companies Act.

Analysis: The Court considered the statutory scheme under Section 248(2) empowering the Central Government to appoint registrars and make regulations and examined Regulation 14(a) and 14(b) made thereunder. It noted that the Regulations allocate investigatory and prosecutorial duties to the Registrar and Assistant Registrar and direct them to request State Counsel or the District Magistrate to take necessary steps in specified circumstances. The Court observed there is no provision in the Indian Companies Act itself requiring that offences under the Act be prosecuted only upon complaint by a particular official. In the absence of any statutory bar, the general criminal law principle that any person may set the criminal law in motion applies. The Regulations, being administrative directions for enforcement, do not oust the right of a citizen or of the Assistant Registrar to prefer a complaint where no statutory restriction exists.

Conclusion: The complaint filed by the Assistant Registrar in this case is valid; the acquittal on the ground of lack of a complaint by the District Magistrate is set aside. In favour of Appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a statutory provision requiring prosecution only upon complaint by a specified official, administrative regulations directing certain officials to investigate or request action do not deprive other persons, including citizens or the Assistant Registrar, of the right to file a valid criminal complaint under the Indian Companies Act.

---