Specific averments are required to fasten NI Act liability on directors; unsupported signatory claims could not disturb discharge.

A director or officer cannot be proceeded against under the Negotiable Instruments Act unless the complaint contains specific averments showing his role and involvement in the transaction or offence. Unsupported assertions that he was the cheque signatory were insufficient here, particularly where no cheque copy was produced and the record showed resignation before presentation of the cheque had been accepted. The dishonour for insufficiency of funds did not alter the position because liability depended on the respondent's connection with the offence at the material time. The Delhi HC upheld the discharge of accused No. 5 and dismissed the revision petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the discharge of accused No. 5 in a complaint under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was liable to be interfered with, in view of the plea that he was the signatory of the cheque and that the dishonour was for insufficiency of funds.

Analysis: The complaint did not disclose that accused No. 5 was the signatory to the cheque, and no copy of the cheque was produced to substantiate that assertion. The record showed that he had resigned from the company much before presentation of the cheque and that his resignation had been accepted. The fact that the cheque was returned for insufficiency of funds did not undermine the trial court's reasoning, because the relevant question was the respondent's role and connection with the offence at the time material to the complaint. The complaint also failed to specify the nature of his involvement, which was necessary for fixing liability in the light of the requirement that specific allegations be made against a director or officer sought to be proceeded against.

Conclusion: The discharge of accused No. 5 was upheld and no interference was called for. The revision petition was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, liability of a director or officer cannot be sustained without specific averments showing his role and involvement in the transaction or offence, and unsupported assertions that he was the signatory are insufficient to disturb a discharge order.

---