https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449944 Section 463(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 permits an officer who reasonably apprehends prosecution for negligence, default, breach of duty, misfeasance or breach of trust to seek relief from the High Court, and the later initiation of criminal proceedings does not by itself defeat that jurisdiction. The text also states that proposed prosecution may be barred where limitation under section 468(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has expired, because cognizance cannot then be taken. It further notes that criminal escalation should follow due process, including fair consideration of the company's reply and a reasoned decision before further action. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Feb 2024 08:23:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449944 Section 463(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 permits an officer who reasonably apprehends prosecution for negligence, default, breach of duty, misfeasance or breach of trust to seek relief from the High Court, and the later initiation of criminal proceedings does not by itself defeat that jurisdiction. The text also states that proposed prosecution may be barred where limitation under section 468(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has expired, because cognizance cannot then be taken. It further notes that criminal escalation should follow due process, including fair consideration of the company's reply and a reasoned decision before further action. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449944