Allowed

Hindustan Agro Chemicals Ltd. and Ors. v. Registrar of Companies and Anr.

Rajasthan HC21 Aug 2019CRLMP/636/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an order of cognizance under the Companies Act alleging they could not produce records as they were held by the Pollution Control Board. The court quashed the order, finding no offence committed.

What did the court decide?

Order of cognizance under Sections 209A(5) and 209A(8) of the Companies Act quashed; proceedings pending before the Court below quashed.

Hindustan Agro Chemicals Ltd. and Ors. Vs Registrar of… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 636/2011

¶3

Hindustan Agro Chemicals Limited, Udai Sagar Crossing, Zink Smelter, Bichadi, Debari-313024.

¶4

N.l. Khetan Son Of Shri G.C. Khetan, R/o 8, Alkapuri, Udaipur.

¶5

Dwarika Prasad Agarwal Son Of Shri B.L. Agarwal, R/o 45, New Fatehpura, Udaipur.

¶6

Narayan Lal Agarwal Son Of Shri B.L. Agarwal, R/o 45, New Fatehpura, Udaipur.

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Registrar Of Companies, Rajasthan Corporate Bhawan, R/o G/6-7, Residency Area, Civil Lines, Jaipur-302001 Rajasthan

¶10

Special Court Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Economic Offences, Jaipur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Sneha Dabla & Mr. Abhas Chaudhary on behalf of Mr. Suruchi Kasliwal.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mukesh Kr. Meena.
For State	: Mr. F.R. Meena, PP.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶14

Order

¶15

21/08/2019

¶16

The matter comes upon an application filed by the petitioners for extension of the interim stay order.

¶17

With the consent of the parties, the matter is finally heard.

¶18

Petitioners have preferred this Criminal Misc. Petition seeking quashing of order of cognizance dated 18.08.2004 passed by Special Court Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[CRLMP-636/2011]

¶21

Offenses) vide which Court has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 209A(5), punishable under Section 209A(8) of the Companies Act.

¶22

It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that in the complaint, it is alleged that the premises of the Company was inspected by the Registrar of Companies on 20.05.2003. Record of the Company was not available at the Registered Office. The Apex Court vide Judgment and Order dated 13.02.1996 had handed over the premises to the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board. Counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to “Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (1996) 3 SCC 212”.

¶23

It is contended that since petitioners were not having the possession of the books and accounts and other documents as possession was taken over by Rajasthan Pollution Control Board in pursuance of the directions of the Apex Court in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (Supra), the order of cognizance is bad in Law.

¶24

Counsel for the Registrar of Companies has opposed the misc. petition. It is contended that there is a violation of Section 209A(5) of the Companies Act which is punishable under Section 209A(8) of the Companies Act. 7. I have considered the contentions and have gone through the record. 8. The Company has gone into liquidation and Official Liquidator has been appointed. Company was sealed on directions of the Apex Court in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (Supra) and the possession was handed over to Rajasthan Pollution Control Board. The Company was thus not

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[CRLMP-636/2011]

¶27

having the books and accounts and other documents at the relevant time when it was inspected by the Registrar of Companies. No offence under Section 209A(5) of the offence is made out.

¶28

In view of the above, misc. petition is allowed. Order of cognizance is quashed. Proceedings pending before the Court below is quashed.

¶29

Stay application stands disposed.

¶30

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶31

CHANDAN /203

Hindustan Agro Chemicals Ltd. and Ors. v. Registrar of Companies and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindustan Agro Chemicals Ltd. and Ors. v. Registrar of Companies and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Kumar Mittal Vs Bhivaram and Anr.

Babulal S/O Shri Pokharram B/C Vishnoi Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharm Singh S/O Shri Diwan Singh B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Singh Beniwal Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Vijay Singh Beniwal Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Bheem (Bheem Singh) S/O Bhoop Singh Vs State of Rajasthan