2019 (2) TMI 1118

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nger, Advocates Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mr. Randeep Sachdeva and Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advocates O R D E R (ORAL) Impugned order of 24th January, 2019 summons petitioner for commission of offence under Sections 418/120B of IPC and under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. Learned senior counsel for petitioner submits that the only allegation leveled against ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... aside, as the trial court has no jurisdiction to summon the petitioner. It is pointed out that the Central Government vide order of 8th January, 2016 has limited the investigation into the affairs of the company, and not in respect of any private individual. It is also pointed out that vide order of 23rd / 24^th February, 2016, Central Government has confined the investigation qua 104 companie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2013 the definition of fraud includes any person who connives in any manner to deceive or to gain undue advantage from any company and so the trial court has the jurisdiction to summon petitioner and in any case, petitioner has efficacious remedy to raise the pleas taken herein before the trial court at the charge stage. It is next submitted that at the summoning stage, indepth examination of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 212 or 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. What is the larger conspiracy cannot be prejudged at this initial stage and is required to be examined at trial. At the summoning stage, limited scrutiny is required to be undertaken. Upon doing so, I find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. This Court finds that the trial court has jurisdiction to proceed against petitioner, as sanction for th....