https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769206 A criminal revision challenging refusal to discharge was rejected where the complaint disclosed a prima facie case that a former director wrongfully withheld company property after cessation of office. The High Court noted that cognizance had been validly taken and process issued on prima facie materials, including allegations concerning a car and other articles, and held that the disputed factual foundation had to be tested at trial. It found no jurisdictional error or perversity in the discharge order and held that the cited precedents did not justify quashing on the facts. The proceedings were therefore allowed to continue. en-us Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Apr 2025 08:31:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769206 A criminal revision challenging refusal to discharge was rejected where the complaint disclosed a prima facie case that a former director wrongfully withheld company property after cessation of office. The High Court noted that cognizance had been validly taken and process issued on prima facie materials, including allegations concerning a car and other articles, and held that the disputed factual foundation had to be tested at trial. It found no jurisdictional error or perversity in the discharge order and held that the cited precedents did not justify quashing on the facts. The proceedings were therefore allowed to continue. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769206