TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (5) TMI 206
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....C. No. Arising out of Cr. Case No. Period of default under section 421, Companies Act. 1. 778/81 1875/77 1-7-67 to 31-12-67 2. 747/81 1881/77 1-1-68 to 30-6-68 3. (CR) 93/81 1833/77 1-7-68 to 31-12-68 4. 779/81 1876/77 1-1-69 to 30-6-69 5. 751/81 1873/77 1-7-69 to 31-12-69 6. 726/81 1830/77 1-1-70 to 30-6-70 7. 756/81 1831/77 1-7-70 to 31-12-70 8. 755/81 1832/77 1-1-71 to 30-6-71 9. 748/81 1877/77 1-7-71 to 31-12-71 10. (CR) 26/81 2830/77 1-1-72 to 30-6-72 11. 780/81 1882/77 1-7-72 to 31-12-72 12. 749/81 1872/77 1-1-73 to 30-6-73 13. 754/81 1879/77 1-7-73 to 31-12-73 14. 634/81 1878/77 1-1-74 to 30-6-74 15. 746/81 1871/77 1-7-74 to 31-12-74 16. 753/81 1870/77 1-1-75 to 30-6-75 17. 752/81 1880/77 1-7-75 to 31-12-75 18. 725/81 1834/77 1-1-76 to 30-6-76 19. 750/81 1869/77 1-7-76 to 31-12-76 The periods of half-yearly defaults run....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d of was stated and explained to the accused persons with their pleas duly recorded. Being aggrieved with the same, the applicants-accused have filed the present petition and the connected ones. Respective learned counsel on both sides have cited certain rulings in support of their contentions, one contending for the clear applicability of section 468(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the other, repelling the same and invoking instead section 472 ibid. The sole point for consideration is whether the failure of the receivers, while in possession of the property, to file the abstract, as required under section 421 of the Companies Act, once in every half year, is a continuing offence or, the offence for every particular half year is complete once and for all on their failure to file the abstract for the particular half year within the prescribed time. I have considered the arguments on both sides in the light of the case-law cited. No decision cited is found to relate specifically to the offence punishable under section 423 of the Companies Act, with which alone I am presently concerned. Some of the rulings cited deal with the distinction between "offence which takes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xplaining the delay. Now, in State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi, AIR 1973 SC 908, the distinction between a "completed offence" and a "continuing offence" is found to be stated thus (at page 909) : "Continuing offence is one which is susceptible of continuance and is distinguishable from the one which is committed once and for all. It is one of those offences which arises out of failure to obey or comply with a rule or its requirement and which involves a penalty, the liability for which continues until the rule or its requirement is obeyed or complied with. On every occasion that such disobedience or non-compliance occurs or recurs, there is the offence committed. The distinction between the two kinds of offences is between an act or omission which constitutes an offence once and for all and an act or omission which continues and, therefore, constitutes a fresh offence every time or occasion on which it continues. In the case of a continuing offence, there is thus the ingredient of continuance of the offence which is absent in the case of an offence which takes place when an act or omission is committed once and for all." A few illustrated cases have also been discussed th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence under section 296(4) of the Companies Act, has held that an act of advance of loan to companies, without prior approval of the Central Government, was complete on the date the loan was advanced, and was not a continuing offence; and as such, the prosecution launched after the period of six months was held to be illegal. In State of Orissa v. Duriodhan Parita [1981] Crl LJ 1671, the Orissa High Court, dealing with the offence under section 14(2) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, has held that the failure to deposit the contribution of provident fund relating to the period from September, 1975, to November, 1975, was not a continuing offence and the offence was complete on the date of failure, necessitating the filing of the complaint within the prescribed time only. In Channabasappa v. State of Karnataka [1979] Crl LJ 185, the Karnataka High Court has held that the non-payment of quarterly vehicle tax under section 12(1) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act was not a continuing offence and, therefore, the prosecution launched after the prescribed period was barred by time. In John Joseph v. State of Maharashtra [1979] Crl LJ 1150,....