Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Veena Rao vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 October, 2020
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari
ITEM NO.25 Court 9 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3137/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06-01-2020
in CRLA No. 970/2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Bombay)
VEENA RAO Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION)
Date : 15-10-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anand Sanjay M.Nuli,Adv.
Mr. Suraj Kaushik,Adv.
Mr. Agam Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Dharm Singh,Adv.
For M/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Form 32 does not exist after the amendment to the Companies Act and what has to be filed is DIR 11 and DIR 12. Possibly, DIR 12 was not filed before the High Court. It is his submission that the petitioner is a non-executive Professional Director of the company whose cheque bounced and was not a signatory to the cheque. On our query, he Signature Not Verified submits Digitally signed by Anita Malhotra Date: 2020.10.16 that she is neither related to any Director nor a 20:18:13 IST Reason:
shareholder in the company but is an advocate aged about 52 year 1 with 30 years of practice with specialization in the corporate/finance field.
He further submits that she was neither a director on the date when the loan was advanced nor Director when the cheque bounced.
Issue notice.
In the meantime, proceedings qua the petitioner alone are stayed in C.C.No.14810/SS/2018 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai.
(ANITA MALHOTRA) (ANITA RANI AHUJA)
COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
2