Director liability in cheque dishonour cases requires specific averments of control, responsibility, or consent, not bare formal allegations.

A director cannot be summoned for a company cheque dishonour offence merely because the complaint states that he or she was in charge of the company. Prosecution under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires clear and specific averments showing the director's actual responsibility for the conduct of the business, or pleading that the offence was committed with consent, connivance, or neglect. A bare repetition of statutory language without particulars is insufficient for summoning. Questions about resignation from directorship may remain factual matters for trial, but the complaint itself must disclose a proper basis before process is issued.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioners, being directors of the drawer-company, could be summoned for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on the basis of a complaint containing only general allegations that they were in charge of the company and actively involved in its affairs.

Analysis: Liability of a director for an offence by a company does not arise merely from the status of being a director. For prosecution to lie under Section 141, the complaint must contain clear and specific averments showing how the person was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company, or that the offence was committed with the person's consent, connivance, or neglect. Bald reproduction of the language of Section 141(1), without particulars of the role played by the accused director, is insufficient to justify summoning. Questions about resignation from directorship were treated as factual matters for trial, but the complaint itself still had to disclose a sufficient basis for summoning.

Conclusion: The petitioners could not be summoned on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint, and the summoning order was liable to be set aside. The complaint remained open only to the extent that action under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be considered later if evidence warranted it.

Ratio Decidendi: In prosecutions for company offences under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, a director can be summoned only on the basis of specific allegations showing the director's actual responsibility for the conduct of the business of the company or the director's consent, connivance, or neglect; omnibus or formal averments are insufficient.

---