2015 (2) TMI 1254

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of section 141 of the said Act when the offence is allegedly committed by the company, without impleading the company as an accused. 3. Before I proceed further it may be noted here that the same issue was raised before this court in criminal application no. 3809 of 2009 filed by the present petitioner and said application was dismissed on 20th January, 2010, holding that the company in such a case is not a necessary party as an accused. 4. The present petition is filed by the petitioner by relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aneeta Hada vs. Godfather Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2693. It is submitted by learned counsel Mr. Abad Ponda, appearing on behalf of the petitioner that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he complaint will have to be decided on the basis of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Anil Hada vs. Indian Acrylic Ltd., reported in [(2000) 1 SCC 1 : AIR 200 SC 145]. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Soni vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in 2013 AIR SCW 1568, particularly on paras 22 and 23. 22. To the same effect is the decision of this Court in Harish Dhingra v. State of Haryana and Ors. : (2001) 9 SCC 550 where this Court observed: "7. Prospective declaration of law is a device innovated by this Court to avoid reopening of settled issues and to prevent multiplicity of proceedings. It is also a device adopted to avoid uncertainty and avoi....