The HC affirmed the vicarious liability of the petitioner under...

The HC affirmed the vicarious liability of the petitioner under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act for dishonored cheques. As a whole-time director and signatory of the company at the time of issuance, the petitioner's subsequent resignation (one day after issuance) did not absolve liability. Unlike in Kamal Goyal, where resignation preceded cheque issuance, here the petitioner resigned after the cheques were issued. The court found sufficient basis for prosecution given the petitioner's role as director when the cheques were issued and specific averments in the complaint regarding his position. The petition challenging the summoning order was accordingly dismissed.

---