0

Data theft laws in India and its implication

Articles

Introduction

In the contemporary era dominated by information, where data holds immense power and serves as a form of currency, the unauthorized acquisition and exploitation of this valuable resource have emerged as a widespread and intricate challenge. This issue carries significant consequences for individuals, organizations, and even entire nations. Recently, a case unfolded, described as potentially the most extensive data leak in the country, involving the exposure of personal details from over 81.5 crore Indians, purportedly sourced from the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). This incident is just one among numerous instances of data breaches, highlighting the urgent necessity for a robust and comprehensive data protection framework.

Data theft, encompassing unauthorized access, acquisition, or retrieval of confidential information, has become a pervasive concern for individuals and enterprises alike. In India, the legal landscape governing data theft has primarily been shaped by the Information Technology Act, 2000, and subsequent amendments. This legislation, coupled with provisions from the Indian Penal Code, has been instrumental in addressing offenses related to unauthorized access and data breaches. 

Data theft laws in India

Data theft, also referred to as data breach or intrusion, entails the unauthorized acquisition, replication, or retrieval of confidential or sensitive information from individuals or enterprises without their knowledge or consent. This may involve the illicit acquisition or hacking of passwords, banking details, personal information, client particulars, or corporate data like trade secrets, software, source codes, and proprietary information. In the Indian context, the regulation of data theft primarily falls under the purview of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Provisions within the IT Act extend penalties to actions related to the disclosure of information in violation of lawful contracts (Section 72A) and breaches of confidentiality and privacy (Section 72). Section 43 addresses unauthorized access to computer systems, networks, or electronic devices, imposing penalties for unauthorized copying, extraction, or downloading of data. Section 66 of the IT Act specifically targets computer-related offenses, including data theft, punishing unauthorized access to computer systems with the intent to commit or facilitate data theft.

While the introduction of the Personal Data Protection Bill in 2019 aimed to bolster data protection and privacy in India, its status as law was pending as of the last update. The bill outlined regulations for the collection, storage, processing, and transfer of personal data.

In instances of data breaches, certain sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) can also come into play. For example, Section 403 deals with the criminal penalty for dishonest misappropriation or conversion of movable property for personal use. Section 378, originally addressing theft of immovable property, could be invoked if data stored in hardware devices like floppy disks or pen drives is stolen.

Moreover, Section 63B of the Indian Copyright Act stipulates punishment for individuals knowingly using a computer or infringing copy of a computer program.

A notable legal precedent was established by the Supreme Court in the case of Jagjeet Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 3583 of 2021). The judgment emphasized that instances of hacking and data theft could be considered offenses under the IPC, highlighting that the IT Act does not exclude the applicability of the IPC in matters related to hacking and data theft.

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023:

The newly passed DPDP Act extensively tackles the concern of data theft and imposes substantial responsibilities on data fiduciaries. These fiduciaries, acting as guardians of personal data, hold the principal duty to protect this information from theft, breaches, and unauthorized access. The legislation mandates the implementation of rigorous protocols, encryption methods, and access controls by data fiduciaries to secure the data they gather and handle.

In contrast to the 2019 version of the bill, the 2023 DPDP Act is more restrained, featuring diminished obligations for businesses and fewer protections for consumers. On the one hand, the regulatory structure is simpler, but on the other, it vests the central government with unguided discretionary powers in some cases. The DPDP Act is applicable to both Indian residents and businesses that collect the data of Indian residents. Notably, it extends its reach to non-citizens residing in India, whose data processing is linked to activities related to the offering of goods or services outside India.

Introducing a pioneering data privacy law in 2023, the act mandates obtaining consent before processing personal data and outlines specific exceptions clearly defined in the legislation. This marks the establishment of India’s first statutory framework for data protection, fostering the gradual development of minimal standards of behavior and compliance for businesses engaged in data collection.

The act excludes non-automated personal data, offline personal data, and personal data in existence for at least 100 years. Notably, the maximum penalty limit of INR 500 crore has been eliminated. As of now, the act does not incorporate provisions for grievance redressal review. The timeline of 72 hours within which a data breach is to be reported to authorities is excluded. 

Apart from the uncertainties surrounding the implementation, there are reservations about certain aspects of the law and how they might compromise the protections seemingly provided by it.

Conclusion

The rapid evolution of information technology presents new legal challenges that transcend traditional categories such as Criminal Law, Intellectual Property Law, Contract, and Tort. One such formidable challenge is the escalating threat of Data Theft, where information in the form of data is illicitly copied or taken from a business or individual without their knowledge or consent.

Recognizing data as a valuable asset, it becomes evident that despite being one of the largest countries globally in terms of internet users, India lacks a robust legal framework to safeguard its citizens’ data. The existing IT laws in India are a decade old and prove insufficient in addressing the contemporary challenges faced by the current generation. Moreover, these laws suffer from inadequate implementation by both the executive and legislative branches. The appointment of adjudicating officers, intended to resolve conflicts, remains unfulfilled in many states. Additionally, there is a lack of standardized guidelines or penalty formats mandated by the legislature for adjudicating officers to follow. This lack of uniformity creates chaos, with different officers employing disparate procedures and judgments based on their individual discretion.

The urgent need is apparent for a robust technical law that can establish a formidable data protection mechanism for the citizens of the country. Laws should not only address present challenges but also anticipate and mitigate potential future issues, providing a comprehensive and adaptive legal framework.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Amrita Rout

 

0

In events affidavit and bond filed for retrieval of money from court’s registry non- complied, would make the appellants as well as their legal heirs accountable for “Criminal Contempt of Court”- Delhi HC

Articles

Title- Bigdot Advertising and Communications Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India

Decided on: 3rd of October, 2023

+ RFA(OS) 128/2013

Introduction

The present appeal is filed by the Directors of the Appellant Company for modification of the judgment given on 27th November 2012 in the suit CS(OS) No. 226/2000, to retrieve the amount lying with the registry of the court.

The Hon’ble High Court directed the Appellants to file for an Affidavit of Undertaking along with the Indemnity Bond, and highlighted that non-compliance with either Affidavit or Bond would make the directors and their legal heirs liable for civil and criminal actions, case any such situations arise and they would also be made liable for “Criminal Contempt of Court”.

Facts of the case

In 1992, Bigdot Advertising and Communications Pvt. Ltd was incorporated. At that time Mr. Satyapal Anand along with his two sons Rajeev and Vimal Anand were Directors of the company.

On 4th of December, 2018 Me. Satyapal Anand passed away, leaving his two sons Rajeev and Vimal as the current directors of the company.

After the father’s death, both the sons decided to no longer continue with the advertisement business.

Initially, a suit CS (OS) No. 226/2000 was filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff to recover the total sum of Rs 3,16,39,009/- along with the outstanding amount, accrued interest, and damages.

The court of single judge bench gave its judgment on 27th Nov 2012 and ordered defendant no. 2 to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,36,01,743,20/- along with other interests, in the court itself and said that the particular amount would only be released when the plaintiff clears their negotiated dues with other publications where they would have done advertisement.

Since both the parties wanted to close the business and that amount had been residing with the registry and they wanted to retrieve it the present appeal was filed.

Court Judgement and Analysis

In the initial hearings the counsel for the appellant submitted before the Hon’ble HC that the Respondent no. 2 as advised through the lower courts Judgement deposited the entire amount which had been lying in this court for so long, it’s been ten years since that decision and no agency have come with a dispute against the appellant to settle their claims as all the negotiated dues to all the publications including newspaper and magazines have already been settled by the Appellant.

Hence the counsel prayed for the release of that money from the court’s registry, he also submitted that in case the court agrees to release the demanded fund subject to the appellant filing an undertaking that in case any publication claim payment arises they would be liable to settle the claim from their own pockets, if the court does so then the Appellants are not interested in filing of RFA as it would only lengthen the process.

Parties then filed for both the documents and court by accepting the documents held that in case of any non-compliance with the documents the two of the directors would be held jointly, severally, and personally bound by the same and them along with their legal heirs in case of any dispute, would be subject to civil and criminal actions and also be made liable for Criminal Contempt of the Court.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

Click here to view judgement

0

In Cases of Missing Annual Confidential Reports for a period, Preceding Periods to be taken into Consideration for Promotion of Medical Officers– Delhi HC

Articles

Title- Virendra Jain v. UOI & Ors

Decided on: October 11, 2023

+ W.P.(C) 9827/2003, CM APPL. 13940/2005

Introduction-

The petition was filed to challenge an order of the Tribunal relating to the promotion of the medical officer and Non-Payment of Salary and how the Annual Confidential Report plays an important role in the determination of merit for promotion. The Court observed the Judgement given in the case of P. Sivanandi v. Rajeev Kumar and Ors. and P. Sivanandi v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors., Civil Appeal Nos. 4822- 4826/2007 and said that the law as stated in the judgment that Delay in writing and review of ACR won’t act as a disadvantage for the Medical Officer is unquestionable but given the particular circumstances of this case and the fact that the officer in question was on several unauthorized leaves, it’s inapplicable. They also highlighted the importance of Section 114 of the Evidence Act read with Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, which draws a presumption that the letter has been delivered to the addressee, especially when the letter has not been received back undelivered.

Facts of the case-

The present petition is for challenging the order dated September 9, 2003, given by Central Administrative Tribunal’s Principal Bench, New Delhi in 0A 59/2003

Where the tribunal had rejected the OA filed by the petitioner by stating that it lacked merit.

The background of the case is that the petitioner, Virendra Jain, In October 1987, was appointed under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in the position of Medical Officer Grade-1, Junior Scale in Central Health Services. Later on, the next year after his appointment, in 1988 he was chosen for appointment to a new post under the Special Protection Group of the Cabinet Secretariat. But in October of the same year, he got suspended because he had been arrested for punishable offenses under section 304 (b), 498(a) [Dowry Death] in IPC. Three years later in 1991, he was acquitted.

The petitioner claimed that he had informed his department about the acquittal in 1991 itself but they revoked his suspension 4 years later in June 1995 and then he joined the services again. He claimed that he had not been paid from the date of his acquittal to June 1995 when he rejoined. He also contended that his promotion had not been considered and claimed that his rights were being denied on the grounds of subsequent confidential reports.

Whereas Respondents contended that during his suspension Virendra Jain was provided with subsistence allowance. Later, in 1995 despite the order of reinstatement, he didn’t join duties. He was fully paid for the periods that he worked and they also allowed him to prove, why the entire period of suspension shouldn’t be treated as Dices- Non [The period which should not be counted for legal purposes].

Respondents argued that by taking into account his previous conduct of unauthorized leaves, he is not fit for promotion.

Key points here are that, On July 24, 2001, the Tribunal examined a matter earlier filed by the petitioner, OA No. 648/2000. The Tribunal’s ruling directed the respondent(s) to make an order by FR 54(B)(1) and (B)(3) guidelines. The Tribunal further ordered the respondent(s) to evaluate the petitioner’s claim while accounting for the decision made by the Supreme Court in the 1991 (2) SCALE 4 case of K.V. Janakiraman v. Union of India.

Abiding by the tribunal’s order the respondents released an order on May 23, 2002, based on CHS Rules, 1982.

Due to the absence of an annual confidential report in the petitioners’ case, which is important to proceed with the promotion, and guidelines for assessing cases without records, the DPC examined Dr Jain’s performance in subsequent years, that is his post-suspension and after reinstatement performance. They observed that he was absent for the periods, 31 Jan 1992 to 5 June 1995 and again for 19 June 1995 to 20th November 1999 onward, and considered the period for Dies-non. And looking at his performance from 1996-1997 also from 11 April 1999 to Dec 16, 1999, and considering the Annual confidentiality report for the said periods they found Dr Jain unfit for promotion because of several unauthorized leaves.

In another case, the Tribunal in OA 59/ 2003 after looking at the inquiry done by DPC concluded that it was a unique situation where the applicant was first appointed in 1987, served his term for 1 year till 1988, and faced criminal charges right after one year of tenure and during that time no confidentiality records were generated, hence relying on the Government of India’s Department of Personnel and training’s instructions dated 20th of June, 1989 which highlights that in situations where no confidentiality reports were generated for a said period, DPC can then consider reports for the preceding years. They also observed that the case of K.V. Janakiraman won’t apply in this scenario, as preceding years as per that case should have been the period for which Virendra Jain was arrested but then again due to the non-availability of CR, the same procedure laid in the said case cannot be followed, hence DPC is correct in observing his ACR for the period’s post-suspension.

The tribunal also found that Virendra’s claim that he received the letter for reinstatement in June 1995 was also false, as a letter dated 28th of April 1995 was sent to him for joining immediately at a correct address and hence under section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act read with Section 27 of general clauses act, the letter is deemed received, so not joining the duty till June 1995 even when the letter was sent on April 1995 was his fault and hence the period cannot be eligible for payment of salary, and one order was also passed by the name of the president of India about revocation in 1992 itself, so the court decided that the claim of Virendra Jain that he had not received the revocation order or any notice till June, 1995 was entirely unconvincing, the court also highlighted that if Dr. Jain genuinely didn’t receive any order or notice and had an issue with it he would have taken any legal action a lot earlier and not approached the court 5 years later in 2000.

Hence, they decided that Dr, Virendra Jain’s case lacked merit and another application O.A 59/2003 was also dismissed.

Courts Judgement and Analysis-

Looking at all the previous contentions of the Petitioner and the Respondents and the orders given in O.A. No. 648/2000 and O.A. 59/2003

Additionally, the Court also heard the Arguments made by the Counsel for Petitioner who had relied on the case of P. Sivanandi v. Rajeev Kumar and Others and P. Sivanandi v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors., Civil Appeal Numbers 4822-4826/2007

The said case upheld that-

“Sivanandi cannot be at a disadvantage because his ACR was drafted and approved by higher authorities after a protracted period. He had no control over the writing or review of his ACR, and we do not see any justification for Sivanandi to suffer a disadvantage just because his senior officers neglected to carry out their duties.”

Court then analyzed the condition and said that, given that the available ACRs cover the years 1996–1997, 1997–98, 1998–1999, and April 1, 1999, to December 16, 1999, and that he was unauthorizedly absent twice, both of which were deemed to be dies–non, and that he was also absent from November 20, 1999, to May 23, 2022, there is some justification for his non-promotion.

They also said that the Judgement in P. Sivanandi’s case is a valid one however looking at the facts of this case and knowing that the petitioner has been on Unauthorized leave a lot of times makes the facts different in this case. Additionally, they added that they had been informed that Dr. Jain already resigned in 2005, so the case of promotion doesn’t stand here, regarding the payment for the period of 1992 to 1995, the court upheld the Tribunal’s decision and highlighted the application of Section 114 of the Evidence Act read with Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, which draws a presumption that the letter has been delivered to the addressee, especially when the letter has not been received back undelivered. Hence the court dismissed the writ application.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

Click here to view judgement

0

Procedural discrepancies in Elections and how it undermines the values of Democracy

Articles

Abstract

India is one of the greatest democracies in the world, providing its citizens the right to choose their representatives under Article 326 of the Indian Constitution via Elections. Elections are a means of establishing legitimacy for political power, which is seen to constitute the art and practice of politics. Only with the confidence that elections are accessible, fair, and unmanipulated can democracy truly function. This Article deals with the various procedural discrepancies that occur during the conduction of an election including a Hike in the Cost of Elections leading to Corruption and Criminal Activities, Crimilization of election procedures, Unfairness via First-past-post system, Erroneous and Defective electoral rolls, voter identity resulting in rigging and Errors during Counting of votes. Further, the article briefly highlights the effect of these discrepancies on the rights of the people of this country, the remedy, and the way forward.

Research Question

To identify the various discrepancies that take place during the conduction of elections in India and a brief analysis of how it’s affecting the democracy of the state

Introduction-

As rightly said by Sir Abraham Lincoln, Democracy is nothing but “Government of the people, for the people, by the people.” This means that to maintain the democracy of a civilized state it is essential that the constitution of that state vests its power in its citizens to choose their representatives, Under Article 326 of the Indian Constitution that power is vested to all its adult citizens above the age of 18, to select their spokespersons for all the elections for Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, the entire procedure takes its origin from the concept of Universal Adult Franchise.

Imagine what happens “when the protector becomes the eater”, the eater of their fundamental rights and thus destroys the sacred nature of democracy.

To maintain this sacred nature, the elections must be conducted in a just and fair manner, right from the proclamation of schedule by the Election Commission of India, which is the first procedure for elections to commence till the counting of votes and declaration of results.

Procedural Discrepancies during Conduction of Elections in India:

  1. Hike in Cost of Elections Leading to Corruption and Criminal Activities-

Elections are very costly affairs and usually, it’s said that to contest elections one may need to spend a lot, the Election commission of India decides the permitted cost of expenditure for elections, and the power is given to them under Article 324[1] of the Constitution, Politicians often complaint about the limits of expenditure allowance being too low for them[2], these restrictions are there to ensure that no corrupt activities are being conducted in the name of publicity of one’s candidature in elections, however when the limits get increased, like in 2022[3], it leads to dishonorable, illegitimate, also mafia led election funding, corruption and generation of black money through various means.[4]

It’s often argued by various Think Tanks that despite whatever the limit is legally been set for the contestants, they are often unrealistic and the amount of cost of expenditure is always higher, [5]which they don’t show in their statement of expenditure prescribed under Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.[6]

  1. Criminalization of Election Procedure –

Many of the candidates come from criminal backgrounds, that a lot of times influence the electoral procedure.

There have been many instances when they used muscle power and money leading to Booth’s Capturing, forcing people to vote for them against their will by using Physical forces and weapons to terrorize them.[7]

One of the prime examples is Mohammad Shahabuddin who was a former MLA from the Siwan constituency in Bihar, He was made liable for killing a JNU Student Chandrashekhar Prasad, and several communist party members and thus Restricted Participation during the 1997 Elections.[8]

  1. First-Past-Post-System-

There are certain difficulties with the current system, which allows voters to choose representatives from their local Panchayats to the national Lok Sabha. All elected officials, including those in the Union Parliament, are expected by the same group of constituents to solve local issues. On the other hand, different role expectations lead to disputes.

In addition, the first-past-the-post voting method and the absence of a direct voter role in candidate selection are concerning. There is a question about the legitimacy of many representatives who are elected with a small percentage of the vote. The fact that many independent candidates and other parties are contributing to the disparity means that more votes are cast against the winners than in their favor. In general, these problems might be caused by the way the electoral system is designed.[9]

  1. Erroneous and Defective electoral rolls, voter identity resulting in rigging-

It is the fundamental document that is required to hold an election. In terms of the voters who are eligible to cast ballots, the electoral rolls specify the parameters of an election. The correctness of the rolls has a major bearing on the integrity of an election. Thus, it is imperative to provide precise and credible electoral rolls. Though there is a vigil mechanism for the preparation of this electoral roll it’s a very hectic task that involves a large number of officials and staff, any falsifications from any end could result in the making of a flawed electoral roll, additionally, the issue of impersonation together results in rigging, which gives unfair results.[10]

  1. Errors during the counting of votes-

In India, the Counting of votes and declaration of results is the final stage of the election procedure. It gets done under the supervision of the Returning officer.

The entire process of counting is typically three stages of randomization procedure.

It gets started via Electronically Transmitted Postal Ballots and Postal Ballots and the EVM counting begins afterwards, 30 minutes post the start of counting done by PB.[11]

Counting votes could be affected by various types of mischiefs like human error or engineered errors, including DoS attacks, the use of other viruses, and malware affecting the entire integrity of calculation.[12] Recently in September 2023, the Election Commission of India opposed the plea of cross-verification of EVMs with VVPATs in every polling booth, in the supreme court, stating that for the count of paper slips, we would need more skilled people and more time, and it would be a step which would take us back in the paper ballot system era leading to more corruption in counting of votes.[13]

Effect on democracy, remedies, and way forward:

Janta/The Populas is just like a small person, entering the electoral booths in the hope of justice, marking a little cut on a tiny piece of sheet by holding a pencil and the total of all those little crosses decides the future of the country and the extent to which his basic rights would be taken care of, this is a very beautiful representation of democratic elections given by Winston Churchill.[14]

The Leaders show them a false picture of a nation so righteous where all their fundamental rights would be protected, through their party manifesto before elections, but right after the elections take place, which encompasses several “Dhandhalis”(Fraudulent practices) their dreams get shattered, not seeing any developments around and facing the same issues that they have been facing since ages, and the saddest part is that there is no law as such which could work like checks and balances for all those false promises. [15]

The State and its leaders become encroachers on people’s freedom of thought, right to elect, movement, right to association, right to religion, right to communication, and their right to equality and speech through various discrepancies during the entire procedure of the election.[16]

Though various provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 act as a remedy for dealing with various electoral offenses, the court proceedings are often very lengthy for handling the election petitions, and it would take the cooperation of all three organs of the democracy, the executive, the legislative and the judiciary to tackle with this issue.[17]

Recall elections which are already prevalent in the US, could be a possible solution that allows voters to remove elected candidates before the end of their official tenure, however, more research would be needed to examine its application and effectiveness in India.[18]

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

References:

[1] Constitution of India | Legislative Department | India. (n.d.). Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india/

[2] Pallathadka, H., & Pallathadka, L. K. (2022, December 7). Challenges and Hurdles Regarding Free and Fair Elections in India: A Study of Voters’ Opinion. Integrated Journal for Research in Arts and Humanities. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.55544/ijrah.2.6.30

[3] Limits of Candidates Expenses Enhanced. (2022, January 6). Election Commission of India. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://eci.gov.in/files/file/13928-limits-of-candidate%E2%80%99s-expenses-enhanced/

[4] Legal Affairs| Chapter 4. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://legalaffairs.gov.in/sites/default/files/chapter%204.pdf

[5] Increased Election Expenditure Limit. (n.d.). Drishti IAS. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-news-analysis/increased-election-expenditure-limit

[6] The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Act No. 43 of 1951).|Legislative Department | Ministry of Law and Justice | GoI. (n.d.). Ministry of Law and Justice. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://lddashboard.legislative.gov.in/electionlawsrelated/representation-people-act-1951-act-no-43-1951

[7]Ibid

[8] The Gun That Killed JNU’s Chandrashekhar 20 Years Ago Was “Secular.” (n.d.). The Wire. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://thewire.in/politics/gun-killed-jnus-chandrashekhar-secular

[9] Ibid

[10] (n.d.). Challenges in the Management of Electoral Rolls. Bharat Nirvachan Aayog. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://hindi.eci.gov.in/files/file/8247-sikkim-e-roll-management/?do=download&r=18881&confirm=1&t=1&csrfKey=0140e9746f198c35f574fa15f490a549

[11] Desk, I. T. W. (2022, December 8). How The Votes Are Counted in Indian Elections. India Today. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://www.indiatoday.in/information/story/how-the-votes-are-counted-in-indian-elections-2306619-2022-12-08

[12] Securing the Vote. (2018, August 30). National Academies Press eBooks. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.17226/25120

[13] Choudhary, A. A. (2023, September 7). VVPATs for All Booths Will Be a Regressive Step: EC in SC. The Times of India. Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/vvpats-for-all-booths-will-be-a-regressive-step-ec-in-sc/articleshow/103484618.cms?from=mdr

[14]Right to Recall and Democratic Fabric of India – Publications Repository (PURE). (n.d.). Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://pure.jgu.edu.in/id/eprint/4334/

[15] Ibid

[16] Ibid

[17] Corrupt Practices and Electoral Offences | State Election Commission, NCT of Delhi. (n.d.). Retrieved December 2, 2023, from https://sec.delhi.gov.in/sec/corrupt-practices-and-electoral-offences

[18] Ibid

0

The Delhi High Court ordered for Dissolution of the company under section 481 of the Companies Act, 1956 as none of the Ex-Directors filed the Statement of Affairs and also failed to submit the records of the company.

Articles

Title: Ganga Sagar & Co. P. LTD v. Ujval Singh Suri & Anr.

Decided on: 26th September, 2023

+CO. APPL. 692/2023 in CRL.O (CO.) 9/2004

Introduction

The Delhi High Court ordered the Dissolution of the Company U/S 481 of the Companies Act, 1956, as per the Judgement given in case of Meghal Homes (P) Ltd Vs Shree Niwas Girni K.K Samiti and Ors., (2007) 7SCC 753, as the Ex- Directors failed to file the Statement of Affairs and also failed to submit the records of the company and due to lack of funds the Official Liquidator Couldn’t Continue with Winding up of Company.

Facts of the Case

The current petition is put in place by the Official Liquidator Appointed for Ganga Sagar & Co. P. LTD, Under Section 481 of the Companies Act, 1956, to discharge him also for dissolution company. The official Liquidator was appointed vide order dated 20th August 2002 and the same information was also published in one Hindi and one English Newspaper on 14th September 2003, Named Dainik Jagran and The Statesman respectively, and in the Delhi Gazette on 24th October 2003.

On 4th August 2003 the concerned officials on Behalf of the Official Liquidator paid a visit to the registered office of the company however that day the possession couldn’t be taken over as the Manager of the said address told the officer that no company by the name of Ganga Sagar & Co. Pvt Ltd existed at that address.

The Concerned officials had also admitted that upon visiting the factory of the company on 9th August 2003 they couldn’t take over the possession of that also because the factory had been auctioned by MPFC, Indore on 12th September 2001 to Ms/Gatiman Auto Pvt. Ltd., the officials also claimed that the Ex-Directors of the Company in dispute, Mr. Ujval Sagar Suri and Narinder Suri didn’t even file the statement of affairs within 21 days as required hence the Official Liquidator filed for a Criminal Complaint under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956.

It was also given by the Official Liquidator in this present petition that as per one order passed on 11th October, 2012, both the Ex Directors were directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 44,14,214.17 the amount which had to be recovered by the Company (In Liqn.) The same order was also sustained by the Division Bench of the present court in an order passed on 20th August 2014. And as per the present application that amount has been deposited with the Office of Official Liquidator.

The Notices inviting claims as per another previous order were also published in one Hindi and one English Newspaper, and the Deadline for submission of the claims was 26th January 2018.

After various settlements of claims, the OL submitted that they do not have sufficient funds or any further assets, moveable or immovable, through which any money can be realized for the Company in the process of liquidation. Hence, the company should be dissolved.

Court analysis and decision

The Court after listening to all the arguments presented by the Official Liquidator analysed that after settling all the claims, that the OL don’t have extra funds or any other moveable or immoveable asset related to the company through which any credit can be realised for the company hence relying on the Judgement given in Meghal Homes (P) Ltd Vs Shree Niwas Girni K.K Samiti and Ors., (2007)  they passed an order on the grounds that since the Liquidator couldn’t continue with the winding up of the company for need of funds or various other valid reasons hence they ordered the OL to shut the books of account of the Company and disposed all pending applications related to the matter and cancelled the next date of hearing.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

click here to view judgment

1 … 14 15 16 17 18 … 81