ORDER

[This order shall also govern final disposal of M.Cr.C. No.2629 of 2025.]

1. The present petition, under section 482/528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/B.N.S.S., has been preferred by the petitioner for quashment of criminal proceedings as well as the order of taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under the provisions of section 129 of the Companies Act, 2013 (''Act of 2013'') registered as Criminal Case No.1767 of 2015 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted before this Court that on 4.12.1991, M/s. Plethico Pharmaceuticals Private Limited was incorporated as private limited company under the Act of 1956 having its Corporate Identification No. L-24232-MP-1991-PLC006801 and was having registered Office at A.B. Road, Manglia, Indore (M.P.) and later on, it was converted into a Limited Company. The respondent/Complainant had filed a complaint dated 11.3.2015 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior against the present petitioner, who was Managing Director at the relevant of point of time, alleging that from Balance Sheet dated 31.12.2012, it was observed that the Company has not complied with the provisions of section 129 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Accounting Standard 11 (AS-11); meaning therey, the effects of changes in foreign exchange issued by the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. The accused/Company had filed its financial statements for the period ended 31.12.2012 with ROC in E-Form AOC- 4 XBRL on 29.1.2014, which according the provisions of secction 468 of Cr.P.C./528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the present complaint should have been filed on or before 28.1.2015 but the present complaint has been filed on 11.3.2015 with a delay of 42 days.

3. While placing reliance on the order dated 15.3.2023 passed in the matter of Pamod Kishore Shrivastava v. Registrar of the Companies & Others vide M.Cr.C. No.35383 of 2023, learned counsel has aruged that balance sheet dated 31.12.2012 has been filed on 29.1.2014 which is the date of the cause of action for the alleged default of the complainant/respondent, therefore, the present complaint should have been filed on or before 28.1.2015 but it has been filed on 11.3.2015 with a delay of 42 days, which is thus barred by limitation as per the provisions of section 468 of Cr.P.C./section 514 of BNSS, 2023.

4. Further while placing reliance on the decision of the Madras High Court Court in the matter of Assistant, Registrar of the Companies v. H.C. Kothari reported in (1992) 75 Comp. Cases 688, it was submitted that after receiving the balance-sheets, it is not open to the Registrar to keep those balance sheets in cold storage or keep his eyes closed and then to deny knowledge of these contents, thereby defeating the law of limitation and when the balance-sheets are received by the Registrar of Companies, he is deemed to have knowledge about the contents of the balance sheets and consequently, of the offence, and limitation will start running from that day onwards and in the present case, the petitioner filed balance sheet dated 31.12.2012 on 29.1.2014 in the office of the respondent and therefore, the complaint should have been filed on or before 28.1.2015 but it was filed on 11.3.2015 which was bad in law. It was thus prayed that the present petition be allowed by quashing the criminal proceedings as well as the order of taking cognizance against the petitioner by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior.

5. On the other hand, Shri Praveen Kumar Newaskar – Dy. SGI for the respondent has opposed the prayer so made by counsel for the petitioner and has prayed for dismissal of the petition alleging that no infirmity has been committed by the Court below in taking the cognizance against the petitioner.

6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Section 514 in Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 re