PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
SC allowed the appeal and quashed all proceedings against the...
Appeal allowed: Proceedings quashed where company not impleaded; officers cannot be prosecuted on mere vicarious liability without direct-role evidence
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
SC allowed the appeal and quashed all proceedings against the appellants. The Court held that a body corporate must be impleaded before prosecuting its directors or officers on vicarious liability grounds; prosecution of officers alone is impermissible where the company (the Bank) was not accused. Absent unimpeachable material establishing each appellant's direct role, authorization, or deliberate omission linking them to the alleged offence, mere designation or bald assertions of vicarious liability cannot sustain issuance of process. The impugned High Court and Magistrate orders were set aside, Complaint No. 6353 of 2007 was quashed in entirety, and appellants were held entitled to statutory protection under the applicable enactment for acts done in good faith.
SC allowed the appeal and quashed all proceedings against the appellants. The Court held that a body corporate must be impleaded before prosecuting its directors or officers on vicarious liability grounds; prosecution of officers alone is impermissible where the company (the Bank) was not accused. Absent unimpeachable material establishing each appellant's direct role, authorization, or deliberate omission linking them to the alleged offence, mere designation or bald assertions of vicarious liability cannot sustain issuance of process. The impugned High Court and Magistrate orders were set aside, Complaint No. 6353 of 2007 was quashed in entirety, and appellants were held entitled to statutory protection under the applicable enactment for acts done in good faith.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.