Vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act survives even if the company is not arraigned as accused.

Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates vicarious penal liability for persons responsible for a company's business, and prosecution of the company is not a condition precedent to proceeding against such persons if the company's commission of the offence is otherwise established. The absence of arraignment of the company, by itself, does not bar a complaint under Section 138 against the drawer and other statutorily liable persons. The complaint was therefore maintainable, and the quashing order could not stand merely because the firm or company had not been joined as an accused.

---

---

Issues: Whether a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the drawer and persons liable under Section 141 can fail merely because the company was not arraigned as an accused.

Analysis: The Court relied on the interpretation of Section 141 and held that the provision creates vicarious penal liability for persons connected with the company's business. It was explained that while the company is the principal offender where the offence is committed by it, the absence of prosecution of the company does not, by itself, bar prosecution of other persons falling within the statutory categories, provided the offence by the company is established.

Conclusion: The complaint was maintainable and the quashing order could not stand merely because the partnership firm or company was not joined as a party-accused.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the quashing order was set aside, and the trial court was directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Prosecution of the company is not a condition precedent to proceeding against other persons made liable under Section 141, if the commission of the offence by the company is otherwise made out.

---