Vicarious liability of company directors requires pleaded consent, connivance, or neglect; summons cannot issue without foundational allegations.

Section 47(2) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 imposes vicarious liability on company directors only where the complaint or supporting material shows that the offence was committed with their consent, connivance, or neglect. The Court held that, because the complaint and the statement recorded before summons contained no allegation against the directors on any of these statutory grounds, there was no proper basis to proceed against them. The summons were therefore found unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether summons issued against the company directors were sustainable in the absence of any allegation or material showing consent, connivance, or neglect under Section 47(2) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

Analysis: Section 47(2) creates vicarious liability for directors, managers, secretaries, or other officers only where the offence committed by the company is shown to have been committed with their consent or connivance, or is attributable to their neglect. The complaint and the statement recorded before issuance of summons contained no such allegation against the appellants. The issuance of summons therefore lacked the necessary foundation and reflected non-application of mind.

Conclusion: The summons issued against the appellants were unsustainable and were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A director can be proceeded against for an offence by a company only when the complaint contains material showing consent, connivance, or neglect as required by the statute; in the absence of such foundational averments, summons cannot be issued.

---