https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113481 The HC quashed the cognizance order and criminal proceeding against the petitioners where the company had already entered liquidation and a provisional liquidator had been appointed before the fixed deposits matured. Once control over the company's assets and records had passed to the liquidator, the petitioners were no longer in a position to refund the deposits when they fell due. Because the complaint omitted this material fact, the Magistrate was not shown the true position, and continuation of the prosecution for alleged offences under Sections 120B, 406 and 420 IPC was held to amount to an abuse of process. en-us Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Oct 2014 20:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113481 The HC quashed the cognizance order and criminal proceeding against the petitioners where the company had already entered liquidation and a provisional liquidator had been appointed before the fixed deposits matured. Once control over the company's assets and records had passed to the liquidator, the petitioners were no longer in a position to refund the deposits when they fell due. Because the complaint omitted this material fact, the Magistrate was not shown the true position, and continuation of the prosecution for alleged offences under Sections 120B, 406 and 420 IPC was held to amount to an abuse of process. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113481