1986 (4) TMI 280

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Respondent. JUDGMENT Sengottuvelan, J.--The petitioners herein have filed the above criminal miscellaneous petitions to quash the proceedings in C.C. Nos. 17820 of 1981, 1456 of 1982, 1457 of 1982, 1458 of 1982 and 1459 of 1982, respectively, on the file of the Economic Offences Court No. II, Egmore, Madras. The facts of the case are briefly as follows: The first petitioner in all these ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovision was punishable with fine which may extend up to the amount of deposit. These deposits were received by the company prior to the amendment to the Companies Act by the introduction of section 58A. Under article 20(1) of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at time of the commission of the offence charged, nor be subjected to a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch prosecution ought to have been launched within six months since the limitation for any offence punishable with a fine is six months, according to section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners, in their memo, have stated that they will not plead the question of limitation if they are tried under the regulation framed under Chapter III of the Reserve Bank of India Act. It is als....