- Offences for which the Companies Act, 2013, accommodates detainment of 2 years or more;
- Cases sent by a Magistrate (where he supposes confinement is superfluous) for any offence conferred under the Companies Act, 2013. This provision will become possibly the most important factor when a person is captured and kept in care, and it creates the impression that the examination can't be finished inside the time of 24 hours as required under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) and there are justifications for trusting that the allegation or data is all around established, and detainment is approved by Magistrate for a period not surpassing 15 days (if requested by Judicial Magistrate) or 7 days (if requested by Executive Magistrate), all things considered. In such cases, the Special Court has the same force as the Magistrate having its ward to attempt such case;
- Take awareness of an offence under the Companies Act, 2013, without the charged being focused on it for trial upon Scrutiny of the police report of the actualities constituting such offence or If an objection has been documented for that benefit.
- An attempt at the same trial an offence for which a denounced might be charged under CrPC notwithstanding an offence under the Companies Act, 2013.
- If the Special Court thinks fit, it might attempt summarily, any offence under the Companies Act, 2013, which is culpable with detainment for a term not surpassing 3 years, given that on account of any conviction in such trial, the individual can't be sentenced for detainment for a term surpassing 1 year.
Offer/Revisions from Special Courts to High Courts
Eminently, for the reasons for enlivening request and modification, the High Court has been allowed ward, as though the Special Court inside the neighbourhood furthest reaches of the purview of the High Court were a Court of Session attempting cases inside the nearby furthest reaches of the locale of the High Court.
Offences Under the Companies Act, 2013, for Which Minimum Punishment is 2 Years or More
Who is punishable?
False declaration of solvency by a Director during the voluntary winding up
Intentionally and fraudulently concealing material information about the company, relating to properties, debts, creditors, from the Company Liquidator during winding up
Off during winding any person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the company have been accustomed to act)
Fraudulently misrepresenting material information about the company to the Company Liquidator during winding up
Taking in pawn or pledge or otherwise receipt of the property,knowing it to be pawned, pledged, or disposed of wherein such property was pawned, pledged or disposed off (in 12 months preceding the commencement of the winding up) on credit and not been paid for and was not in the ordinary course of business
Any person who does such act knowingly
The commitment of fraud provided fraud in question involves public interest
Any person found guilty of such fraud
Intentionally giving false evidence upon any examination on oath or solemn affirmation, authorized under the Companies Act, 2013
Any person giving such false evidence
Intentionally giving false evidence in any affidavit, deposition or solemn affirmation, in or about the winding up of any company under the Companies Act, 2013, or in or about any matter arising under the Companies Act, 2013
Special courts have been notified by the Companies Act 2013, as to provide speedy trials and judgments which took normally years. These 8 special courts will help to reduce the burden. The goal of setting up these courts is to let justice courts attempt minor infringement, and that graver offence ought to be managed by Special Courts.
Legistify connects you with the best lawyers in India and top Chartered Accountants in India with simple telephonic conversation or email. Call us at 011-33138123 or send us an email at email@example.com to get started.