https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106170 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a director's subsequent resignation does not by itself negate liability where the complaint links the cheque to an earlier transaction and the directors were part of the arrangement when it was made. Specific averments that the directors were in charge of the company's day-to-day affairs, supported by the complainant's sworn verification before the Magistrate, can constitute sufficient prima facie material for issuance of process. On the facts discussed, the absence of postal acknowledgment and reliance on cases involving only bald allegations did not undermine the complaint, and the process against the directors was sustained. en-us Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:30:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106170 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a director's subsequent resignation does not by itself negate liability where the complaint links the cheque to an earlier transaction and the directors were part of the arrangement when it was made. Specific averments that the directors were in charge of the company's day-to-day affairs, supported by the complainant's sworn verification before the Magistrate, can constitute sufficient prima facie material for issuance of process. On the facts discussed, the absence of postal acknowledgment and reliance on cases involving only bald allegations did not undermine the complaint, and the process against the directors was sustained. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106170