Official Liquidator of Helios Finance & Investment Ltd. v. Sanjay Kumar Singh & Ors.

COMPANIES ACT, 1956,

--Statement of affairs to be made to Official Liquidator --Cognizance taken for offence under sections 454(5) and 454(5A) Petition filed for discharge under sections 245(2) and 251 of Cr.P.C. --Maintainability of --Where petitioner filed petition for discharge under sections 245(2) and 251 of Cr.P.C for offence under sections 454(5) and 454(5A) of Companies Act, 1956, but section 251 of Cr.P.C. dealt with summons cases and section 245(2) of Cr.P.C. dealt with trial of warrant cases, there was no occasion for consideration of the discharge petition, thus, the discharge petition was not maintainable.--Petitioner (SKS) made default in complying with requirement of section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956. Therefore, cognizance was taken for offence under sections 454(5) and 454(5A) of the Companies Act, 1956 against the petitioner. The petitioner filed petition by way of interlocutory application for discharge under sections 245(2) and 251 of the Cr.P.C. Official liquidator raised objection in respect of maintainability of the discharge petition. Held: Section 251 occurs in Chapter XX of the Cr.P.C., which deals with summons cases. A bare perusal of section 251, shows that there is no provision for framing of charge thereunder and there could be no occasion for consideration of the discharge petition. Further that, the petition for discharge was not maintainable also under section 245(2) of the Cr.P.C., which came under Chapter XIX and dealt with trial of warrant cases. Thus, the discharge petition was dismissed.