1980 (12) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....evision No. 115 of 1980 arises, is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Calcutta. Case No, C/786 of 1978, out of which Criminal Revision No. 116 of 1980 arises, is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Calcutta. In both the cases, on behalf of the petitioners, it was contended before the learned Magistrate that cognizance was wrongly taken as the petitions of complaint were filed beyond the period of limitation. The learned Magistrates negatived the contentions and hence, the Rules. In the first case, the learned Magistrate found that the offence, complained of, is a continuing offence and as such section 468 of the Code is not applicable. In the other case, it was found on facts that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The allegation in the petition of complaint is that the balance-sheet and P & L a/cs., were not placed at the company's annual general meeting. This being the allegation, according to Mr Roy, such negligence and/or omission which amounts to an offence cannot cause any grief to the Asst. Registrar. It may cause grief to the shareholders of the company. In support of his contention, Mr. Roy refers to a decision reported in [1978] Cr LJ 116 (Mad.) (Sulochana v. State Registrar of Chits, Investigation and Prosecution, Madras). This was a case under the Tamil Nadu Chit Funds Act and the complaint was filed by the Registrar of Chits (Investigation and Prosecution), Madras. It was held by Natarajan J. "The words ' person aggrieved by the offenc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... no substance in the arguments of the learned advocate for the petitioners. Under section 621 of the Companies Act read with section 2(40) of the Act, the Asst. Registrar of Companies was a person competent to file such a complaint. That being so, the Asst. Registrar of Companies was the person aggrieved in the instant case". Section 2(40) of the Companies Act defines "Registrar" in the following way: " 'Registrar' means a Registrar, an Additional, a Joint, a Deputy or an Assistant Registrar having the duty of registering the Companies under this Act". So, there is no difficulty in the matter of filing a petition of complaint by an Asst. Registrar. Section 621 of the Companies Act provides as follows : "No court shall take cogni....