DROC vs Inder Goel and 2 others — 5118/2019
Case under Companies Act Section 628. Status: Show Cause. Next hearing: 11th March 2026 Date Not Updated.
Complaint Case
CNR: WBSP050095852019
Filing Number
9543/2019
Filing Date
15-Oct-2019
Registration No
5118/2019
Registration Date
15-Oct-2019
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipur, South 24 Parganas
Judge
4-CJM
Last updated 13-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DROC
Adv. S.k.jaiswal
Respondent(s)
-
1.Inder Goel and 2 others
Case History
-
11-Mar-2026
Next hearingPending
-
21-Jul-2025
Show Cause
CJM
-
25-Apr-2024
Show Cause
CJM
-
15-Feb-2024
Show Cause
CJM
-
13-Oct-2023
Charge / Plea Hearing
CJM
-
27-Jul-2023
order by courtView PDF
Summary The court rejected the accused's petition challenging the maintainability of the case under Section 628 of the Companies Act, 1956. Although the court acknowledged the merit in the accused's argument regarding Section 465 of the Companies Act, 2013 (which saved only prosecutions pending before the 2013 Act's commencement), it held that having already taken cognizance and issued process, it lacked inherent powers to recall the order—a remedy available only to higher courts under Section 482 CrPC. The case is adjourned to 13-10-2023 for the accused's appearance and examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jul-2023
Charge / Plea Hearing
CJM
-
23-Jun-2023
Hearing
CJM
-
31-May-2023
Hearing
CJM
-
30-May-2023
Hearing
CJM
-
29-Mar-2023
Appearance
CJM
-
19-Jan-2023
Appearance
CJM
-
30-Dec-2022
Appearance
CJM
-
15-Sep-2022
Hearing
CJM
-
17-Jun-2022
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
10-Jun-2022
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
22-Mar-2022
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
01-Mar-2022
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
02-May-2021
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
27-Dec-2020
Sr/Ad/Appearence
CJM
-
30-Dec-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Oct-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 5118/2019
Summary The court rejected the accused's petition challenging the maintainability of the case under Section 628 of the Companies Act, 1956. Although the court acknowledged the merit in the accused's argument regarding Section 465 of the Companies Act, 2013 (which saved only prosecutions pending before the 2013 Act's commencement), it held that having already taken cognizance and issued process, it lacked inherent powers to recall the order—a remedy available only to higher courts under Section 482 CrPC. The case is adjourned to 13-10-2023 for the accused's appearance and examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts