These three appeals by the Public Prosecutor raise for consideration the proper interpretation of section 91-B(1) of the Indian Companies Act. The Magistrate before whom the accused in the several appeals were charged has held that there was no contravention of the provisions of this section and has by his judgment dated 31st January, 1956, acquitted the accused. It is from this order of acquittal that these appeals have been preferred. The learned Advocate-General appearing for the appellant urged that he desired to have a considered decision on the construction of the provision I have mentioned above but as I was clearly of the opinion that the decision of the learned Magistrate was correct, I did not think it necessary to issue notice to the accused under section 422, Criminal Procedure Code.

The facts which have given rise to these proceedings are as follows:-Messrs. Oakley Bowden & Co. (Madras), Ltd., is a public company registered under the Indian Companies Act. It is managed by the Board of three directors and under the Articles of the company the Board acts either at meetings or by resolutions passed by circulation.

On 2nd June, 1953, the Board of Directors which then co