Strict pleading under Section 141 NI Act: a mere director designation is not enough to sustain vicarious criminal liability.

Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act imposes penal vicarious liability and requires strict pleading and proof. A complaint against a director must specifically aver that he was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the relevant time, and must explain how and in what manner that responsibility arose; a bare assertion that he was a director is insufficient. As the complaint lacked this specific averment, the requirements of Section 141 were not met and the summoning order could not be sustained against the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Whether a director could be proceeded against under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in the absence of a specific averment in the complaint that he was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the relevant time.

Analysis: Liability under Section 141 is a penal and vicarious liability and, therefore, requires strict pleading and proof. A mere statement that the accused is a director is insufficient. The complaint must specifically disclose the role of the accused and state how and in what manner he was in charge of and responsible to the company for its business when the offence was committed. Since the complaint did not contain such an averment, the requirements of Section 141 were not satisfied.

Conclusion: The summoning order could not be sustained against the appellant and was quashed.

---