M. P. CHINNAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THE brief facts leading to these cases are that the respondent/complainant in all these cases lodged complaints before the learned Special Court for Economic Offences in Karnataka, at bangalore, on the allegation that the petitioner companies had violated certain provisions of law in not sending the share certificates duly transferred in his name, failed to send the balance-sheet and memorandum of articles, etc. and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 39 (2), 113 (2) and 219 (4) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short "the Act" ). The learned magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences in all the ca. ses and directed to issue summons to the petitioners herein. In some cases, the petitioners approached the court and made applications under Section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code to discharge the accused persons on the ground that the said court has no territorial jurisdiction to try the cases as the registered offices of those companies are situated outside the Karnataka State. The learned magistrate after hearing both the parties rejected the application holding that the court had territorial jurisdiction to try the offences. As agai

Click Here to Read the rest of this document