Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Vishal Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual overview of the case and initiation of criminal proceedings against the auditor and directors. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. petitioner's challenge based on lack of authorization, lack of specific allegations, limitation, and applicability of relevant statutes. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 3. respondent's contention regarding the role of the auditor and the authority of the deputy registrar to file complaints. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 4. court's analysis of the necessity for specific allegations of fraud and criminal intent against the auditor. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 5. determination of the maintainability of complaints filed by the deputy registrar and the application of limitation periods under the companies act. (Para 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 6. necessity of specific, non-vague allegations to prevent abuse of process when pursuing criminal proceedings against professionals. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 7. quashing of criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice and prevent judicial abuse. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
Judgm
Non-compliance with Section 148 of the Companies Act, 2013, constitutes a continuing offence, and the complaint was not barred by limitation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
