VISHAL SHARMA DIKSHITA CHOMAL vs State of West Bengal AND ANR — CRR /1883/2020
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973 Section 482. Disposed: --ALLOWED on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA1114032020
Next Hearing
23rd December 2020
Filing Number
CRR /100572/2020
Filing Date
22-12-2020
Registration No
CRR /1883/2020
Registration Date
22-12-2020
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )
Sub-Category
Quashing of Proceedings ( 75 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL SECTION
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VISHAL SHARMA DIKSHITA CHOMAL
Respondent(s)
State of West Bengal AND ANR
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
MOTION
PART HEARD MATTERS
PART HEARD MATTERS
PART HEARD MATTERS
PART HEARD MATTERS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-12-2020 | MOTION | |
| 27-01-2026 | PART HEARD MATTERS | |
| 22-01-2026 | PART HEARD MATTERS | |
| 21-01-2026 | PART HEARD MATTERS | |
| 20-01-2026 | PART HEARD MATTERS |
Orders
Summary The Calcutta High Court quashed criminal proceedings against auditor Vishal Sharma under Section 448 of the Companies Act, 2013, finding the complaints lacked specific allegations demonstrating the auditor's knowing involvement in false statements or material omissions. The court held that while the Deputy Registrar had authority to file complaints, the allegations against the auditor were vague and general in nature, focusing primarily on company directors, and continued prosecution would constitute an abuse of process lacking reasonable prospect of conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Calcutta High Court quashed criminal proceedings against auditor Vishal Sharma under Section 448 of the Companies Act, 2013, finding the complaints lacked specific allegations demonstrating the auditor's knowing involvement in false statements or material omissions. The court held that while the Deputy Registrar had authority to file complaints, the allegations against the auditor were vague and general in nature, focusing primarily on company directors, and continued prosecution would constitute an abuse of process lacking reasonable prospect of conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts