Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a complaint under section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could proceed against a person described as an incharge, manager or director when the drawer concern was only described as a business concern and the complaint did not clearly disclose that it was a company, firm or other juristic entity.
Analysis: Vicarious liability under section 141 is attracted only where the principal offender is a company, firm or other association contemplated by the provision, because liability of directors, partners or persons in charge is derivative. A proprietary concern is not a company or a firm, and its proprietor alone is responsible for its affairs. The complaint's description of the accused concern as a business concern was vague and did not identify the legal status of the drawer concern. In the absence of clear averments showing that the appellant fell within the category of persons liable under section 141, mere use of designations such as manager or director was insufficient to sustain prosecution. The complaint therefore failed to bring the case within the statutory framework requiring specific pleadings for vicarious liability.
Conclusion: The prosecution against the appellant was not sustainable and the complaint was liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: Vicarious criminal liability under section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 arises only when the complaint contains clear averments showing that the accused falls within the statutorily specified category and the drawer concern is one to which the provision applies; a vague description of a proprietary concern does not suffice.