TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (4) TMI 763
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses, can be culled out from one of them. The petitioner has filed a complaint against the J.V. Finance Ltd. (a company incorporated under the Companies Act) and others including the respondent for an offence alleged to have been committed by the company under section 58B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (the 'Act'). The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on the complaint and issued process against the accused persons except the respondent. The learned Magistrate declined to issue the process against the respondent on the ground that no documentary evidence has been produced by the petitioner to show that the respondent 'was working in the capacity of Executive Director (Finance) of the company.' Feeling aggrieved, the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thing contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the same was committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary, or other officer or employee of the company, such director, manager, secretary, other officer or employee shall also be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Explanation 1. - Any offence punishable under this Act shall be deemed to have been committed at the place where the registered office or the principal place of business, as the case may be, in India of the company is situated. Explanation 2. - For the pur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Financial Institution as a loan Company. Accused No. 2 is the Chairman of the Accused No. 1 Company and accused No. 3 is a Director of Accused No. 1 Company. Accused No. 4 is the Executive Director of the Company. Accused No. 5 is also one of the Directors of the Accused No. 1 company. All the accused No. 2 to 5 have the active involvement in the commission of the offences. Under section 58C of the R.B.I. Act, 1934 the Chairman & Directors of the Accused No. 1 Company who were incharge of & were responsible to, the Accused No. 1 Company for the conduct of its business, at the time of the contravention/Default are also guilty and are liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly jointly and severally. "8. That Accused No. 2 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... conflicted with the functions of the statutory auditor, and writing of audit report was only done as a merely statutory obligation which the company has to comply with. As such there was no auditor of the company which checked the financial and accounting accuracy of the group companies, as what was to be supposedly checked was done by the same man. 5. In the instant case a clear averment has been made in the complaint to show that the respondent being the Executive Director of the offending company was incharge and was responsible for the business of the company. In this view of the matter it cannot be said that the averments contained in the complaint do not implicate the respondent. As to what would be the evidence against the respon....