Private Complaint For Offences Under IPC, Other Laws Not Barred Under Section 37 Of M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently observed that a private complaint alleging commission of offences under Indian Penal Code and other laws is maintainable and will not be barred under section 37 of M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973.

The court had framed the question as to whether a complaint filed by a private party against members of a registered society is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable in view of the provisions of section 18, 32 and 37(2) of the Act.

The petition was filed seeking the quashing of a complaint filed before the JMFC whereby cognizance of the complaint was taken and a warrant of arrest was issued against two of the applicants. 

The applicants and the private respondents are members of Swami Vivekanand Takniki Sanstha which is a registered society under the M.P society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. A complaint has been filed by the respondents alleging financial irregularities purported to have been committed by the applicants in relation to the Swami Vivekanand Institution. 

The Counsel appearing for the applicants argued that the complaint filed by the respondents is not maintainable in view of provisions of sections 18, 32 and 37(2) of M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam 1973 which is a special Act especially formulated to deal with some eventuality. 

However, the counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that in view of provisions of Sections 18, 32 and 37 of the Act, there is no bar for a competent court of law to take cognizance of the offence under the IPC.

Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla, after considering the contentions raised by the parties and perusing Sections 18, 32 and 37 of the act, observed that it is clear that the Registrar has been conferred powers for holding an enquiry into the constitution, working and financial conditions of a society.

"Thus, the power of the Registrar to make an enquiry is confined to the constitution, working and financial conditions of the society. The scope of enquiry is limited to the said extent of constitution, working and financial conditions of the society. Chapter-IX deals with offences and penalties," the Court said. 

Regarding Section 18, the court said "it is evident that any member of the society who is found to have involved in steal, purloin or embezzle any money or other property, or willfully any maliciously destroy or injure any property of such society, or shall forge any deed, bound security for money receipt, or other instrument, whereby the funds of the society may be, exposed to loss shall be subject to the same prosecution, and if convicted shall be liable to be punished in the like manner as any person other than a member would be subject and liable to in respect of the like offences,"

The Court observed that the M P Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam was enacted with the object to consolidate and amend the law relating to the registration of literary, scientific, educational, religious, charitable or other societies in the State and the power of the Registrar under sections 27 and 32 for making an enquiry and settlement of a dispute is confined only to the constitution, working and financial condition of the society.

The court further said that the provision of section 37 is included in Chapter IX which deals with offences and penalties. The bar under subsection (1) is that - no Court inferior to that of a Magistrate of the First Class shall try an offence punishable under this Act.

"The emphasis has to be laid on the word ‘under this Act’, means the offences which are punishable under the M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 and not under the general law of IPC or any other Act," the court said.

The provisions of subsection (2) of Section 37 further clarify that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this Act, except upon a complaint made by the Registrar or any other person authorised in writing on this behalf.

"Thus, if both the provisions of subsection (1) and subsection (2) of Section 37 are read together, it is evident that the bar is only in respect of the offence under the Act which are mentioned in Chapter-IX of the Adhiniyam, 1973 and not under the IPC or any other law," the court observed. 

The court observed that in this case, serious allegations have been levelled against the applicants for the commission of offences punishable under the IPC. 

"Contention of applicants cannot be accepted that complaint is not maintainable in view of bar under section 37 of the Adhiniyam, 1973. Apart from that, it is not in dispute that the charges have already been framed by the trial court," it added.

Case Title: Anoop Mishra and Ors. v. Alka Dubey and Ors. 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 28

Advocate L S Chandiramani appeared for the Applicants.

Senior Advocate Ajay Bagadia, Advocates Gajendra Singh Chouhan and Mamta Shandilya appeared for the Respondents. 

Click Here To Read/Download Order