Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

High Court Rules No Legal Right for Petitioners to Demand Reports During Investigation, Emphasizes on Uninterrupted Legal Procedures

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Kapil


In a significant ruling today, the High Court, led by Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, delivered a crucial judgment in the case W.P.A. 23787 of 2023, involving petitioners Aloke Chatterjee and another versus the Union of India and another. The court firmly stated that there is no legal right for the petitioners to demand the furnishing of a report under Section 208 of the Companies Act, 2013, during the ongoing investigation stage.

The petitioners had argued that the non-furnishing of the report essentially rendered the investigation a farce. However, the court observed, “at this stage, there is no occasion or legal right of the petitioners to insist upon furnishing of a copy of the report filed by the ROC under Section 208.” This statement underlines the court’s stance on the procedural norms of investigations.

The case revolved around the petitioners’ contention that the investigation against them was flawed due to the non-receipt of a report, as purportedly required under the Companies Act, 2013. They argued that this omission violated the principles of natural justice and procedural norms. However, the court highlighted that “in every pre-investigation inquiry, rights of hearing have to be incorporated on an overly inflated conception of audi alteram partem, no investigation would reach its logical culmination.”

The court’s decision was informed by a careful analysis of the Companies Act, 2013, particularly Sections 206 to 210, and relevant legal precedents. Notably, the court referenced two judgments that dealt with similar provisions but found that they did not support the petitioners’ demands for the report during the investigation phase.

Date of Decision: 16th November 2023

Aloke Chatterjee and Another VS Union of India and another

Latest Legal News