Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.943-945 OF 2002
Shyam Sunder Arora Etc. ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Ajay Chaturvedi and Ors. Etc. Etc. ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By the impugned order, the High Court has quashed
First Information Report Nos.315 of 2000 and 434 of 2000
lodged at police station, Vigyan Nagar, Kota on the grounds
that no offence was committed within the jurisdiction the
court at Kota; that no offence was committed under the
Indian Penal Code (for short, `IPC') and the offence, if
any, was committed under the Companies Act for which the
complaint could have been filed only at the place of
company's registered office, i.e., Mumbai.
We have carefully perused the two First Information
Reports and are convinced that the offence was committed
not only under the Companies Act, but also under the
various provisions of the IPC and the High Court was not
justified in holding otherwise. We are further of the view
that in respect of the offence committed under the
Companies Act, courts at Mumbai may have jurisdiction, but
the offence under various provisions of the IPC was
committed within the jurisdiction of courts at Kota. This
being the position, the impugned order is liable to be set
aside.
....2/-
- 2 -
Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, impugned order
rendered by the High Court is set aside and petitions under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, filed
before the High Court are dismissed. Now the Police shall
proceed to investigate the cases in accordance with law.
......................J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
......................J.
[G.S. SINGHVI]
New Delhi,
July 29, 2009.