TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging issuance of process and seeking quashment of criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, are maintainable through a power of attorney; (ii) Whether such quashment applications are maintainable by directors and non-executive/nominee directors when the primary corporate accused (the company) is not contesting or the application against the company is dismissed.
Issue (i): Whether applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging issuance of process and seeking quashment of proceedings under Section 138 NI Act are maintainable through a power of attorney.
Analysis: Section 138 NI Act proceedings are in personam and punitive in nature; statutory scheme and precedent restrict third parties from prosecuting or defending criminal proceedings by proxy unless a legally recognised disability exists. Provisions of the Code (including Sections 205 and 273) permit appearance by pleader in limited circumstances but do not permit substitution by a power of attorney holder for acts that require party-in-person. Section 2 of the Power of Attorney Act does not override statutory requirements mandating personal capacity where the law prescribes it. The applicants did not demonstrate any legally recognised disability or a specific legal basis authorising the power of attorney holder to initiate quashment proceedings on their behalf.
Conclusion: Applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to challenge issuance of process and to seek quashment of proceedings under Section 138 NI Act are not maintainable through a power of attorney.
Issue (ii): Whether directors and non-executive/nominee directors can maintain quashment applications in respect of corporate offences when the company (primary accused) is not effectively contesting or has had its application dismissed.
Analysis: Corporate offences attract vicarious liability only where a person was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the material time. The company is the primary offender for corporate acts; directors may be proceeded against if they satisfy the statutory criteria of responsibility and control (see the statutory provision on corporate liability). Absent impleading or participation of the company, directors seeking independent quashment of proceedings challenging issuance of process risk collateral or inconsistent adjudications and may amount to abuse of process. The applicants failed to establish that they were not responsible for company affairs or that they had independent grounds to maintain the quashment applications apart from the company.
Conclusion: Quashment applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging issuance of process in Section 138 NI Act proceedings are not maintainable at the behest of the directors alone in the absence of the company; the applications are dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the issuance of process and the prayers for quashment under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are dismissed both because such applications cannot be prosecuted through a power of attorney holder and because directors cannot independently maintain quashment proceedings for corporate offences in the absence of the company; the criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act should proceed and trial be expedited.
Ratio Decidendi: A petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash issuance of process in Section 138 NI Act matters must be filed by the aggrieved accused in person (or through recognised exceptions for minors or persons of unsound mind) and directors cannot independently obtain quashment of corporate offence proceedings in the absence of the company; a power of attorney does not confer authority to file such criminal quashment petitions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
