Case Law Details

Case Name : Khulood Imp ex Private Limited & Ors. VS The Registrar Of Companies (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : Crl. M.C. No. 2730/2009
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/03/2012
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All High Courts (4247) Delhi High Court (1296)

Khulood Imp ex Private Limited & Ors. VS The Registrar Of Companies (Delhi High Court)-  A bare perusal of section 469 CrPC makes it amply clear that the period of limitation commences from the day the offence comes to the knowledge of the complainant. In the present case the “offence” of non-compliance with the order came to the knowledge of Respondent/ Complainant when the petitioners defaulted in furnishing the details to the Respondent/ Complainant at the expiry of the compliance period of the Order dated 20.11.2006 u/s 234 (3A).

Thus the computation of the limitation shall begin from the date of expiry of the compliance period as provided vide Order dated 20.11.2006 u/s 234(3A) of the Act. The cognizance of the offence was taken on 19.05.2007 which is within the period of limitation of the alleged offence. Therefore the period of limitation begins from the day actionable knowledge is gained by the competent authority.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT IS AS FOLLOWS:-

HIGH COURT OF DELHI 

Crl. M.C. No. 2730/2009

Date of Decision: 01.03.2012

M/S. KHULOOD IMP EX PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. 

Versus

THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES  

ORDER

1. The present petition assails the order of the Ld. ACMM dated 19.05.2007 summoning the Petitioner and seeks quashing of the CC No. 938/2007 contending the cognizance taken by the Ld. ACMM to be beyond the period of limitation.

2. The brief facts necessitating the disposal of the present petition are that a complaint was received by the Regional Director, Northern Region, Noida regarding irregularity/ illegality in the affairs of the Petitioner Company. The complaint was forwarded to the Respondent/ Complainant for it to take appropriate action. Thereafter the Respondent/ Complainant vide order dated 10/10/2006 u/S 234(1) of the Companies Act (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟) called upon certain documents and details qua the Petitioner company. The Accused vide their letter dated 09.11.2006 communicated to the Respondent/ Complainant their inability to furnish the necessary details and sought time for the same. Not receiving the desired information within the time sought by the petitioners, order dated 20.11.2006 u/s 234 (3A) of the Act was issued to the petitioners and again 7 days time was sought by the Petitioners. That on examining the replies it was understood that the Petitioners were evading and neglecting to furnish the desired information and thus a show cause notice under section 234 (4)(a) was issued against the Petitioners which evoked no response. Thereafter a report u/s 234 (6) of the Act was sent to the Central Government with the necessary particulars seeking advice on prosecuting the Petitioners and after examining the case the Central Government gave the go ahead for the prosecution of the Petitioners under section 234 (4)(a) of the Act. The complaint was received in the court of the Ld. ACMM on 11.05.2007 and the summons issued to Petitioners on 19.05.2007.

3. The present petition brings up an interesting question as to the commencement of the period of limitation for an offence. It is an admitted fact that the Petitioners had filed a reply to the Order u/s 234 (1) vide letter dated 09.11.2006. Thereafter not receiving the desired information the Respondent/ Complainant vide order dated 20.11.2006 issued another order seeking such details from the Petitioners. Section 469 CrPC establishes the date from which the period of limitation for taking cognizance of an offence ought to begin. Section 469 CrPC reads as follows:

469. Commencement of the period of limitations.(1) The period of limitation, in relation to an offence, shall commence,-

(a) On the date of the offence; or

(b) Where the commission of the offence was not known to the person aggrieved by the offence or to any police officer, the first day on which such offence comes to the knowledge of such person or to any police officer, whichever is earlier; or

(c) Where it is not known by whom the offence was committed, the first day on which the identity of the offender is known to the person aggrieved by the offence or to the police officer making investigation into the offence, whichever is earlier.

(2) In computing the said period, the day from which such period is to be computed shall be excluded.

4. A bare perusal of section 469 CrPC makes it amply clear that the period of limitation commences from the day the offence comes to the knowledge of the complainant. In the present case the “offence” of non-compliance with the order came to the knowledge of Respondent/ Complainant when the petitioners defaulted in furnishing the details to the Respondent/ Complainant at the expiry of the compliance period of the Order dated 20.11.2006 u/s 234 (3A). Thus the computation of the limitation shall begin from the date of expiry of the compliance period as provided vide Order dated 20.11.2006 u/s 234(3A) of the Act. The cognizance of the offence was taken on 19.05.2007 which is within the period of limitation of the alleged offence. Therefore the period of limitation begins from the day actionable knowledge is gained by the competent authority.

5. In view of the above observations I find no merit in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

More Under Company Law

Posted Under

Category : Company Law (4004)
Type : Judiciary (12066)
Tags : high court judgments (4562)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured Posts