JUDGMENT

BHAGAWATI, J. :— These three appeals arise out of the same facts and it would, therefore, be convenient to dispose of them by a common judgment. The respondent in all the three appeals is one Haridas Mundra. He was at all material times the managing director of S. B. Industrial Development Co. (Pvt.) Ltd., who were the managing agents of a company called Richardson & Cruddas Ltd. He and his brothers Tulsidas Mundra were also directors of Richaredson & Cruddas Ltd. The Life Insurance Corporation of India, which was the largest shareholder, filed a petition in the High Court of Calcutta being Matter No. 357 of 1957 seeking relief against mismanagement of Richardson and Cruddas Ltd. under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act. 1956. The respondents and other directors were impleaded as party-respondents to the petition. The High Court on the application of the Life Insurance Corporation, made an interim order sometime in December 1957 appointing Sir Dhirendra Mitra as Special Officer to manage the affairs of Richardson& Cruddas Ltd. There was an audit report made by M/s. Gutgutia & Co., Charted Accountants, in regard to the accounts of Richardsan & Cruddas Ltd., but the special Officer was not satisfied with this report and he, therefore, afterobtaining directions from the Company Judge, appointed M/s Ferguson & Co. a reputed firm of Charted Accountants, to examine the accounts of the Company and submittheir report. Ferguson & Co. found, as a result of their investigation, that there were two bills in the records of Company, one of the Rs. 4,12,000/- dated 20th June 1955 and the other for Rs. 6,18,900/- dated 27th June, 1955 purporting to be issued by a firm called Indian Machine Tools Co. having its address at 7. Mission Row, Calcutta, showing purchase of certain machinery by Richardson & Cruddas Ltd. from Indian Machine Tools Co. and on the strength of these two bills, entries were made in the books of account of Richardson & Cruddas Ltd. on 24th June, 1955 in respect of the first bill and on 29th June, 1955 in respect of the second bill, crediting the amounts of the bills to S. B. Industrial Development Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. and debiting to the machinery account. On making inquires, Ferguson & Co. discovered that there was no firm of Indian Machine Tools Co. in existence at 7, Mission Row, Calcutta and no machinery was in fact purchased or received by Richardson & Cruddas. Ltd. as shown in the two bills supposed to have been made out by Indian Machine Tools Co. The conclusion reached by Ferguson & Co. as a result of this probe was that Richardson & Cruddas Ltd. had been defrauded of an aggregate sum of Rs. 10,60,900/- representing the amount of the two bills and that amount had been siphoned off to S. B. Industrial Development Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. by using and using these two bills, which were forged, as genuine and they made a report to this effect to the Special Officer. The Special Officer, on receipt of the report, made an application to the Company Judge for a direction that he might be authorised to lodge a complaint with the police for further investigation into these facts set out in the report. The Company Judge gave the necessary direction and the Special Officer thereupon moved the police for making further investigation in the matter. The Special Police Establishment started the investigation and ultimately submitted a charge-sheet against the respondent and Tulsidas Mundra in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate. The respondent and Tulsidas Mundra were committed by the Chief Presidency Magistrate to stand their trial before the HIGH Court on charges under Ss. 120B, 409, 471 read with S. 468 and S. 477A against the respondent and Ss. 120B and 409 of the Indian Penal Code against Tulsidas Mundra. When the trial commenced before the High Court, the Public Prosecutor made two applications on 17th April, 1967, one of for amending the charges against the respondent by dropping Sections 120B and 409 and Section