CHANDRA KUMAR DHANUKA Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OF the 12 show -cause notices in respect of which the present proceedings have been instituted, four have been pressed with more vigour than the others, though the Registrar has made no concession in respect of the others.

(2.) IN the affidavit used by the Registrar, a point of law has been urged. The Registrar contends, in substance, that for the provisions of Section 633(2) of the Act to apply, the petitioning officer must first concede as to default and then seek pardon by demonstrating that he had acted honestly and reasonably. It is urged, that the High Court has to take into account the circumstances of the accepted default.

(3.) SUB -section (2) confers on the High Court the same power as the criminal court in granting relief to the petitioning officer who apprehends that proceedings might be brought against him in respect of any negligence, default, breach of duty, misfeasance or breach of trust. Sub -section (2), in its closing part, identifies the criminal court and provides that the High Court will have the same powers as the criminal court to relieve a petitioning officer. The expression "if it had been a court before which a proceeding against that officer...had been brought under Sub -section (1)" makes it clear that the High Court in exercise of powers under Sub -section (2) will have the same powers as the court receiving the criminal proceedings. Such expression does not imply that the High Court will exercise only such powers under Sub -section (2) that the criminal court may, upon the criminal court finding the charged officer guilty. For the criminal court to relieve the charged officer, such court may or may not conclude that the charged officer is liable. There can be no other meaning to the expression "he is or may be liable" found in Sub -section (1). If the criminal court can relieve a charged officer without coming to any conclusion that the charged officer is actually guilty or is liable for the offence, so can the High Court. In taking into account the surrounding circumstances, the criminal court may form a tentative opinion, without a full -fledged trial, as to whether there may not have been any offence at all. In considering whether a charged officer should be relieved, and before conducting the trial at which guilt may be established, the surrounding circumstances that the criminal court can look into would include a tentative view of the likelihood of the charge being established.