Monday 26 June 2023

M/s. KVR Industries Private Limited vs M/s. P. P. Bafna Ventures Private Limited - In our view in appropriate case, the Adjudicating Authority has powers to act in terms of Section 340 of Cr. P.C. read with Section 195 of Cr. P.C.

NCLAT (18.12.2020) In M/s. KVR Industries Private Limited  vs M/s. P. P. Bafna Ventures Private Limited [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 626 of 2020 ] held that;

  • # 17. . . . . . . . . In our view in appropriate case, the Adjudicating Authority has powers to act in terms of Section 340 of Cr. P.C. read with Section 195 of Cr. P.C.

  • Under Section 340 of Cr. P.C. the Adjudicating Authority can hold preliminary inquiry if it is “of opinion that it is expedient in the Interest of Justice that an inquiry should be made” into the any offence referred in Clause ‘b’ of Sub-Section 1 of Section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, i.e.- Adjudicating Authority, here.


Excerpts of the order; 

Such action for Criminal Prosecution should have been taken? 

13. The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned Order observed that no order of prosecution of the person verifying the affidavit can be ordered by the Authority and it was outside the realm of jurisdiction of the Authority. For such reasoning, the Adjudicating Authority without going into the merits of I.A. No. 51 and 52 of 2020 proceeded to observe that the Corporate Debtor may approach the appropriate forum for redressal. It observed that, it would be venturing into jurisdiction of Criminal Court if it went into I.A. No. 51 and 52 of 2020. 


With regard to these observations and findings, reference needs to be made to Section 424 of the Companies Act, 2013 which was amended by Act 31 of 2016 w.e.f. 15.11.2016 and reference to IBC was inserted. Section 424 of the Companies Act, 2013 reads as under (amended Section 424): 

  • “424. Procedure Before Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal.- (1) The Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall not, while disposing of any proceeding before it or, as the case may be, an appeal before it, be bound by the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice, and, subject to the other provisions of this Act 1[or of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016] and of any rules made thereunder, the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall have power to regulate their own procedure. 

  • (2) The Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall have, for the purposes of discharging their functions under this Act 1[or under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016], the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908.) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:— 

  • (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; 

  • (b) requiring the discovery and production of documents; 

  • (c) receiving evidence on affidavits; 

  • (d) subject to the provisions of sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, requisitioning any public record or document or a copy of such record or document from any office; 

  • (e) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents; 

  • (f) dismissing a representation for default or deciding it ex parte; 

  • (g) setting aside any order of dismissal of any representation for default or any order passed by it ex parte; and 

  • (h) any other matter which may be prescribed. 

  • (3) Any order made by the Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal may be enforced by that Tribunal in the same manner as if it were a decree made by a court in a suit pending therein, and it shall be lawful for the Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal to send for execution of its orders to the court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction,—

  • (a) in the case of an order against a company, the registered office of the company is situate; or 

  • (b) in the case of an order against any other person, the person concerned voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain. 

  • (4) All proceedings before the Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228, and for the purposes of section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be civil court for the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).” 

  • (Emphasis Supplied) 


14. Now Section 195 of IPC requires reference. The same reads as follows: 

  • “(1) No Court shall take cognizance- 

  • (a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or 

  • (ii) of any abetment of, or attempt to commit, such offence, or 

  • (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate; 

  • (b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or 

  • (ii) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, or 

  • (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in subclause (i) or sub- clause (ii), 29[except on the complaint in writing of that Court, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate.] 

  • (2) Where a complaint has been made by a public servant under clause (a) of sub- section (1) any authority to which he is administratively subordinate may order the withdrawal of the complaint and send a copy of such order to the Court; and upon its receipt by the Court, no further proceedings shall be taken on the complaint: 

  • Provided that no such withdrawal shall be ordered if the trial in the Court of first instance has been concluded. 

  • (3) In clause (b) of sub- section (1), the term" Court" means a Civil, Revenue or Criminal Court, and includes a tribunal constituted by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act if declared by that Act to be a Court for the purposes of this section. 

  • (4) For the purposes of clause (b) of sub- section (1), a Court shall be deemed to be subordinate to the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the appealable decrees or sentences of such former Court, or in the case of a Civil Court from whose decrees no appeal ordinarily lies, to the principal Court having ordinary original civil jurisdiction within whose local jurisdiction such Civil Court in situate: 

  • Provided that- (a) where appeals lie to more than one Court, the Appellate Court of inferior jurisdiction shall be the Court to which such Court shall be deemed to be subordinate; 

  • (b) where appeals lie to a Civil and also to a Revenue Court, such Court shall be deemed to be subordinate to the Civil or Revenue Court according to the nature of the case or proceeding in connection with which the offence is alleged to have been committed.” 


15. Section 340 of Cr. P.C. is also relevant and is as follows: 

  • 340. (1) When, upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of subsection (1) of section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary,- 

  • (a) record a finding to that effect; 

  • (b) make a complaint thereof in writing; 

  • (c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction; 

  • (d) take sufficient security for the appearance of the accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non- bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do, send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and 

  • (e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate. 

  • (2) The power conferred on a Court by sub- section (1) in respect of an offence may, in any case where that Court has neither made a complaint under sub- section (1) in respect of that offence nor rejected an application for the making of such complaint, be exercised by the Court to which such former Court is subordinate within the meaning of sub- section (4) of section 195. 

  • (3) A complaint made under this section shall be signed,- 

  • (a) where the Court making the complaint is a High Court, by such officer of the Court as the Court may appoint; *[

  • (b) in any other case, by the presiding officer of the Court, or by such officer of the Court as the Court may authorise in writing in this behalf.] 

  • (4) In this section," Court" has the same meaning as in section 195.” 


16. As the Corporate Debtor is harping on Section 193 of Penal Code the same also be referred which is as under: 

  • “193. Punishment for false evidence.—Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 193 of Penal Code has three explanations which are not necessary to reproduce but can be kept in the view. 


17. Section 195 (3) of Cr. P.C. referred above shows that the term “Court” used in the Section includes the Tribunal constituted by or under Central, Provincial or State Act if declared by that Act to be a Court for the purposes of this Section. We have already seen Section 424 which in Sub-Section 4 has included the National Company Law Tribunal and National Company Law Appellant Tribunal under the Companies Act and proceedings before these Tribunals have to be deemed to be Judicial Proceedings within the meaning of Section 193 and 228 and for the purposes of Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code and the NCLT this Tribunal shall be deemed to be Civil Court for the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of Cr. P.C. Chapter XXVI contains Section 340 of Cr. P.C. As per Section 5 (1) of IBC the “Adjudicating Authority” for the purposes of Part-II of IBC, means National Company Law Tribunal constituted under Section 408 of the Companies Act, 2013. Under Section 61 of IBC any person aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority may prefer an Appeal to National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. These Provisions make it clear that Adjudicating Authority was not right in its observations that it did not have jurisdiction to order Prosecution. In our view in appropriate case, the Adjudicating Authority has powers to act in terms of Section 340 of Cr. P.C. read with Section 195 of Cr. P.C. Under Section 340 of Cr. P.C. the Adjudicating Authority can hold preliminary inquiry if it is “of opinion that it is expedient in the Interest of Justice that an inquiry should be made” into the any offence referred in Clause ‘b’ of Sub-Section 1 of Section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, i.e.- Adjudicating Authority, here. 


---------------------------------------------



 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer:

The sole purpose of this post is to create awareness on the "IBC - Case Law" and to provide synopsis of the concerned case law, must not be used as a guide for taking or recommending any action or decision. A reader must refer to the full citation of the order & do one's own research and seek professional advice if he intends to take any action or decision in the matters covered in this post.