https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106135 A company court dealing with oppression and mismanagement proceedings could not assume criminal jurisdiction to take cognizance of alleged offences under the Companies Act. The power to commence a criminal trial must be expressly conferred by statute, and section 406 with Schedule XI did not authorise such action at the interlocutory stage, especially without a complaint, identified accused persons, or a prima facie finding after conclusion of the main proceedings. In the absence of an express special procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure applied, and the direction to begin criminal trial was without authority of law and unsustainable. en-us Fri, 18 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Mar 2012 17:27:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106135 A company court dealing with oppression and mismanagement proceedings could not assume criminal jurisdiction to take cognizance of alleged offences under the Companies Act. The power to commence a criminal trial must be expressly conferred by statute, and section 406 with Schedule XI did not authorise such action at the interlocutory stage, especially without a complaint, identified accused persons, or a prima facie finding after conclusion of the main proceedings. In the absence of an express special procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure applied, and the direction to begin criminal trial was without authority of law and unsustainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 18 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106135