Karnataka High Court
M S A Aleem vs State Of Karnataka on 7 February, 2012
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
HGH COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COl f oe 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 7™ DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012 . BEFORE TONS THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA. _ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3425/2007 oetweew. as MSAALEEM ; $/O LATE SYED ABBAS AGED ABOUT 55 YRS © Bs FORMER PROMOTER DIRECTOR OF FLORA WALL COVERING LTD., NO.36, DCOSTA SQUARE : TI CROSS, CCOKE TOWN | THOMAS TOWN POST. os BANGALORE pace .. PETITIONER (By SRI JAYA VITAL RAO KOLAR, ADV.) AND: od STATE OF KARNATAKA _ BY ANEKAL TOWN _ POLICE STATION BY SHO. 2. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES 'E' WING, '2ND FLOOR KENDRIYASADAN _ KORAMANGALA _ BANGALORE-560 034. . RESPONDENTS
"(BY SRI VJAY KUMAR MAJAGE, HCGP FOR R-i SEKI M.K.BOPAIAH, ADV. FOR R-2} CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DT.29.4.2007 FILED BY THE ANEKAL POLICE AND REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.68/ 2007 ON HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH (
- 2.
THE FILE OF JMFC, ANEKAL AND PASS NECESSARY ORDERS THEREON. | THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR aniisaion 7 THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
The matter is listed for admission. Wit th. the consent of learned Counsel for. partion, it is: taker: up for final disposal.
2.1 have heard Sri Jaye * Vittal Rao Kolar, learned Sertior Counsel. for petitioner and Sri M.K.Bopaiah, learned. 'Senior "Sianding Counsel and the learned Qovernment Pleader fi fer the State.
ws registered against petitioner in Crime No.68/ 2007 for offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 415, 418, 420 and 424 IPC.
- 4. The learned Senior Counsel for petitioner has . made following submissions:
i) The complamant namely, Register of Companies in Karnataka is not the aggrieved wer by Xx rd. ;
HGH COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COl person by the offences alleged against
ii) The averments of first information. 'accsuted. at their face value do not constitute afferices | oo alleged therein a |
ii) The petitioner did not have the intention of . cheating.
5. The learned Senior Stenting Cc Counsel would submit that" petitioner, ws g 'the Chairman and Managing Director of a Public Company namely, M/s. Flora Wall, Covering Limited. The aforestated company - is a regiatered 'Company and a hundred percent export oriented Company. The petitioner had
-- furnictea untrue statements in the prospectus while "inviting shares 'from public. In the prospectus, it was stated that 90% of the capital would be collected by me Boating public shares. The petitioner had received duty ; free imported raw silk. The petitioner without fulfilling export obligations has sold imported raw silk in black market and made profit. The Company has become defunct. The shareholders have been cheated. The vO: mind ;
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH ( Company Secretary has the duty to protect the interests of shareholders. A G6. Apart from registration of first, information, | there is no further investigation of crime At this stage, :
this Court hee to accept | the averments. of first - information at their face value. 'The averments of complaint would disclose that petitioner with dishonest interest had iseued prospectus. The petitioner having stated in the prospectus that Comyeny would receive subscription of 90% (Re. 4, 5 'ake from shareholders, had net received the evid. mony from the shareholders. Even then, a prospectus was published to show that Company had received 90% of its capital from the . 7 "shareholders. The - petitioner-Company, an hundred . percent export oriented unit, after getting the duty free | : imported raw ailk did not fulfill the export obligations. On the other hand, the petitioner sold the imported raw silk in black market at a premium rate. The petitioner hed not filed declaration before SEBI which is mandatory as M/s.Flora Wall Covering Limited is a lwted company. The petitioner cannot question the iGH COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH CGURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT GF KARNATAKA HIGH COL
- 5 -
locus standi of complainant, who is statutorily bound to protect the interest of shareholders.
7. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that there are no grounds to quash. the 'Sret information :
report. The petition is accordingly, diemiseed, a "sal 'JUDGE TLAE.