Partner alone not liable in cheque dishonour case where partnership firm was not impleaded as accused under Section 141.

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was held not maintainable against a partner in his individual capacity where the cheque was issued in the name of a partnership firm and the firm itself was not arraigned as an accused. The court applied Section 141 and reiterated that liability for a firm's cheque dishonour first attaches to the firm as principal offender, and to persons in charge only when the foundational averments and necessary arraignment are made. Because the complaint and evidence showed the alleged debt belonged to the firm, no independent individual liability was established against the partner alone, and the acquittal was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was maintainable against a partner in his individual capacity when the cheque was issued in the name of a partnership firm and the firm was not arrayed as an accused.

Analysis: The complaint itself described the transaction as one connected with the business of the partnership firm, but the firm was not impleaded as the principal accused. The cheque and the surrounding facts showed that the alleged liability was attributable to the firm, and the statutory scheme of Section 141 fastens liability on the company or firm as the principal offender and then on persons in charge only when the foundational requirements are satisfied. In the absence of necessary averments and arraignment of the firm, the prosecution of the partner alone was held to be legally unsustainable. The Court also noted that the complainant's own pleading and evidence did not establish a maintainable individual liability apart from the firm.

Conclusion: The complaint against the respondent alone was not maintainable, and the acquittal was upheld.

---