https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105874 The complaint and summons were directed at the company through its executive chairman, not against the petitioner in his personal capacity, so he could not be treated as an individual accused. Inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was not warranted because the merits of the complaint and the issuance of process against the company and other persons were matters for the trial magistrate. The challenge was therefore misconceived, and the application was rejected. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Mar 2012 12:41:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105874 The complaint and summons were directed at the company through its executive chairman, not against the petitioner in his personal capacity, so he could not be treated as an individual accused. Inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was not warranted because the merits of the complaint and the issuance of process against the company and other persons were matters for the trial magistrate. The challenge was therefore misconceived, and the application was rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 16 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105874