https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432407 Disputed questions of fact prevented quashing of criminal proceedings against a company director under Section 482 CrPC. Although he claimed to be only an independent director and therefore outside the scope of key managerial personnel and an officer in default under the Companies Act, the record included company filings and board minutes showing his designation as director when the decision to invite deposits was taken. Because his actual status and conduct required evidence and factual determination, the High Court held that the extraordinary quashing jurisdiction could not be used to terminate the prosecution at the threshold. en-us Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jan 2023 08:25:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432407 Disputed questions of fact prevented quashing of criminal proceedings against a company director under Section 482 CrPC. Although he claimed to be only an independent director and therefore outside the scope of key managerial personnel and an officer in default under the Companies Act, the record included company filings and board minutes showing his designation as director when the decision to invite deposits was taken. Because his actual status and conduct required evidence and factual determination, the High Court held that the extraordinary quashing jurisdiction could not be used to terminate the prosecution at the threshold. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432407