As per case facts, petitioners faced a complaint from SEBI for operating an unregistered collective investment scheme, failing to refund investor funds, and not complying with SEBI's directions to wind ... up the scheme. Petitioners argued that they had suspended operations and refunded amounts, and that the company was dissolved. They also contended that the complaint was beyond the limitation period as per earlier law. The question arose whether the alleged violation constituted a continuing offense, thereby exempting it from typical limitation periods, and if the enhanced penalties from a later amendment applied. Finally, the court ruled that the failure to refund investor money and comply with SEBI's winding-up directives was a continuing offense. This meant the offense persisted daily until compliance, making the complaint not time-barred. The court stressed the SEBI Act's purpose in protecting investors, confirming that such non-compliance generates a fresh offense each day, and dismissed the quashing application.