TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (4) TMI 793
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re said to have been committed by A-1 company, the other accused are prosecuted for the said offences in view of section 58C of the RBI Act. 2. The principal ground on which the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Milind Gokhle, seeks quashing of these proceedings is that the learned magistrate, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, has not applied his mind before taking cognizance of the offences in question. In support of his contention, he cites a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Punjab National Bank v. Surendra Prasad Sinha AIR 1992 SC 1815, in which the Supreme Court held that the court should be circumspect and judicious in exercising discretion and take all the relevant facts and circumstances into c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he magistrate gives some indication in his order that he has looked into the material and that the order passed by him is based on material furnished by the complainant for taking cognizance of the offence. In this case, the order in question as stated above is very cryptic and does not give any indication that the learned magistrate has applied his mind. It is true that section 58B provides for penalties and various sub-sections therein create distinct offences. To that extent, the order of the learned magistrate is quite unsatisfactory inasmuch as it does not give any indication of the magistrate having applied his mind with reference to the facts of the case. But, this cannot be considered conclusive of the fact that the magistrate has n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. 7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that except the managing director and chairman, it is difficult to conceive that the 16 other accused who are merely the directors can be proceeded against by virtue of the provision of section 58C. It is true that it appears somewhat improbable that besides the managing director and chairman, a large number of such other directors could really be held to be in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. But, it certainly is a question of fact. In a given case, directors other than the managing director or executive director, etc., may, on the facts and circumst....