Vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act requires material showing control over business, not mere deemed ownership.

Vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act attaches only where material shows the accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at the relevant time. A bare assertion that a person was a deemed or real owner is insufficient when the complaint and accompanying documents do not show him as a partner or authorised signatory of the firm. Where unimpeachable material indicates absence of partnership or control and there is no contrary evidence, continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process. The summoning order and complaint were quashed against the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the summoning order and complaint under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be quashed against a person who was neither shown to be a partner nor the authorised signatory of the firm and against whom only a bald assertion of being a deemed owner was made.

Analysis: Vicarious liability under Section 141 arises only where the accused is shown, by material on record, to be in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company or firm at the time of the offence. Mere assertions in the complaint that a person is a deemed or real owner are insufficient when the complaint and the documents placed on record do not show that person as a partner or signatory of the cheque. Where the accused produces unimpeachable material indicating absence of partnership or control, and the complainant brings no contrary evidence, continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of the process of law.

Conclusion: The summoning order and complaint against the petitioner were liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The prosecution could not be sustained against the petitioner in the absence of material showing his partnership, control, or role in issuance of the cheque, and the proceedings were set aside as against him.

Ratio Decidendi: A person cannot be subjected to prosecution under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on a mere bald assertion of deemed ownership unless there is material showing that he was in charge of, and responsible for, the conduct of the business at the relevant time.

---