Shri Devineni Seetharamaiah v. The Registrar Of Companies

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON Nos.8 5 3 3 , 8 5 5 9 an d 8 5 7 0 of 2 0 1 1 COMMON ORDER:

The criminal petitions are filed by the petitioner seeking for quash of the proceedings in CC.Nos.125, 126 and 127 of 2010 on the file of Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad. 2.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, who takes notice for R2. None appears for R1 in spite of service of notice.

3.

The case is stated to be a covered case. Counsel for the petitioner files an order of this Court in CRLP.Nos.5428, 5431 and 5540 of 2010 dated 28.03.2013, filed by A2 in this case. He states that the petitioner herein also stands on the same footing as A2. This Court, by considering the merits of the case, quashed the proceedings against A2.

4.

A perusal of the complaint shows that no specific allegations are made against this petitioner also. This Court, in the above referred order, observed that the first respondent failed to show the participation of the petitioner in issuance of the prospectus and the first respondent failed to show that the contents of the prospectus are violative of Sections 63, 68 and 628 of the Companies Act and held that any further proceedings would only result in abuse of process of law.

Hence, following the aforesaid order and in terms thereof, the criminal petitions are allowed and the further proceedings in CC.Nos.125, 126 and 127 of 2010 on the file of Special Judge for Economic Offences, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad against the petitioner herein are hereby quashed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________ T. RAJANI, J November 14, 2017 DSK