Tribunal Division Bench, Chennai, under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was dismissed as withdrawn. It is the contention of the complainant that immediately realising the mistake committed by him in not impleading the company, he filed appropriate petitions before the trial court. In the decision in U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Messrs Modi Distillery and others (cited supra), it has been held that the prosecution and trial against the accused cannot be allowed to be defeated merely because of a technical and a curable defect in the complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The facts of the said case are that the U.P.Pollution Control Board instead of launching a prosecution against M/s. Modi Industries Ltd., filed a private complaint against the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Managing Director and Members of Board of Directors of the Company for polluting the Kali River through the Kadrabad Drain while manufacturing Industrial alcohol. The High Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashed the private complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. on the ground that there could no vicarious liability saddled on the Chairman, Vice Chairman, etc., unless there was a prosecution of the Company. On an Page 16 of 21
