Bombay High Court Holds Criminal Complaints Under Section 138 NI Act Not Covered by Company Law Moratorium. The expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Sections 442 and 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956 does not include criminal proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 40
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves a reference to resolve a conflict between two Single Judge judgments of the Bombay High Court regarding whether criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) are covered by the expressions 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) and 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442 of the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner, Indorama Synthetics (I) Limited, filed a criminal complaint against respondent No.2 (M/s. Amar Polyester Ltd.) and its director (respondent No.3) for an offence under Section 138 NI Act. During the pendency of the complaint, respondent No.2 company went into winding up. The petitioner sought to proceed with the criminal complaint, but the question arose whether leave of the Company Court under Section 446(1) was required. The learned Single Judge referred the matter to a larger Bench due to conflicting views. The Division Bench analyzed the language of Sections 442 and 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, and held that the term 'suit' does not include criminal proceedings, and the term 'other proceedings' must be interpreted ejusdem generis with 'suit', thus limiting it to civil proceedings. The court noted that the purpose of these provisions is to protect the company's assets during winding up, which is not relevant to criminal proceedings. The court also observed that Section 138 NI Act creates a criminal offence and the proceedings are criminal in nature. Therefore, the court answered the reference by holding that criminal complaints under Section 138 NI Act are not included in the expressions 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) and 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442 of the Companies Act, 1956. The matter was directed to be placed before the appropriate Single Judge for disposal in accordance with this opinion.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Winding Up - Interpretation of 'suit or other proceedings' - Sections 442, 446(1) Companies Act, 1956 - The court considered whether criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 fall within the ambit of 'suit or other proceedings' under Sections 442 and 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956. Held that criminal proceedings are not 'suits' and the term 'other proceedings' must be construed ejusdem generis with 'suit', thus excluding criminal complaints. (Paras 1-31)

B) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Criminal Complaint - The court examined the nature of proceedings under Section 138 NI Act and concluded that they are criminal in nature and not civil proceedings akin to suits. Therefore, they are not covered by the moratorium under Sections 442 and 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956. (Paras 2-31)

C) Company Law - Winding Up - Leave of Company Court - Section 446(1) Companies Act, 1956 - The court held that the requirement of obtaining leave of the Company Court under Section 446(1) applies only to suits and civil proceedings, not to criminal complaints. The purpose of the provision is to protect the assets of the company in winding up, which is not relevant to criminal proceedings. (Paras 20-31)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) and the expression 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442, under Chapter II of Part VII of the Companies Act, 1956, include criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court answered the reference by holding that the expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) and the expression 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442 of the Companies Act, 1956 do not include criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The matter was directed to be placed before the appropriate Single Judge for disposal in accordance with this opinion.

Law Points

  • Interpretation of 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) Companies Act
  • 1956
  • Interpretation of 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442 Companies Act
  • Scope of winding up provisions
  • Criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act not covered by company law moratorium
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (05) 21

Criminal Writ Petition No.1280 of 2010

2016-05-06

S.C. Dharmadhikari, Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi

Mr. Mangesh Patil for the Petitioner

Indorama Synthetics (I) Limited

State of Maharashtra, M/s. Amar Polyester Ltd., G.S. Baldva

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Reference to resolve conflict between two Single Judge judgments regarding interpretation of Sections 442 and 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956 in context of criminal complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to proceed with criminal complaint under Section 138 NI Act against respondents without obtaining leave of Company Court under Section 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956.

Filing Reason

Petitioner filed criminal complaint for dishonour of cheque; during pendency, respondent company went into winding up, raising question whether leave of Company Court was required.

Previous Decisions

Two conflicting Single Judge judgments of Bombay High Court on the issue; matter referred to Division Bench.

Issues

Whether criminal complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are included in the expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956? Whether criminal complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are included in the expression 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442 of Companies Act, 1956?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act are not 'suits' and not 'other proceedings' within the meaning of Sections 442 and 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956, as they are criminal in nature and not civil proceedings. Respondents did not appear.

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'suit' in Sections 442 and 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 does not include criminal proceedings. The term 'other proceedings' must be construed ejusdem generis with 'suit', limiting it to civil proceedings. Criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are not covered by the moratorium provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.

Judgment Excerpts

Whether the expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Section 446(1) and the expression 'suit or proceedings' in Section 442, under Chapter II of Part VII of the Companies Act,1956, include criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ? The term 'suit' does not include criminal proceedings and the term 'other proceedings' must be interpreted ejusdem generis with 'suit', thus limiting it to civil proceedings.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed Criminal Case No.899/SS/2005 under Section 138 NI Act in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 21st Court, Bandra, Mumbai. During pendency, respondent company went into winding up. The question of leave under Section 446(1) arose. The learned Single Judge referred the matter to a larger Bench due to conflicting views. The Division Bench heard the reference and delivered judgment on 6th May 2016.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 1956: 442, 446(1)
  • Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Holds Criminal Complaints Under Section 138 NI Act Not Covered by Company Law Moratorium. The expression 'suit or other proceedings' in Sections 442 and 446(1) of Companies Act, 1956 does not include criminal proceedings under Secti...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows PIL Against Unauthorized Construction on Communidade Land for Sunburn Festival. Court Orders Demolition and Restoration, Holding That Communidade Land Is Public Trust and Cannot Be Used Without Valid Permissions.