SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1972 Supreme(Ker) 168

V.KHALID
HELEN RUBBER INDUSTRIES – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The refusal by the learned District Magistrate, Ernakulam, to exempt the personal attendance of the accused in some cases under the Companies Act that came before him has resulted in these revision petitions. The petitioners before me were proceeded against for non-submission of the returns and balance sheet for offences under S.159,162, 614A, 220 (1) and 220 (3) of the Companies Act. Against most of them there are two cases for two separate offences. In all these cases, except one, they indicated their intention to plead guilty and receive sentence. The proper exercise of discretion in these cases, in the interests of justice and expeditious disposal of cases, would have been to exempt personal attendance of the accused, accept the plea of guilty and impose such sentence as the Court felt necessary in the circumstances of the case. The learned District Magistrate thought otherwise. Hence I am constrained to consider the question involved in some detail and lay down the procedure to be adopted in similar cases.

2. All the petitioners are Directors of their respective companies. Some of them are ladies and some old, residing in various parts of the State.

3. The provisi



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top