https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113485 For prosecution of company directors under sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaint must contain specific and unambiguous averments that each accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the relevant time; a bare reference to directorship or general responsibility is insufficient. The Supreme Court also noted that a complainant bank could not sustain the prosecution merely by describing itself as a holder in due course where the pleaded facts did not establish an independent basis for liability. The complaint was therefore held not maintainable against the directors, and the quashing of proceedings was affirmed. en-us Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Nov 2016 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113485 For prosecution of company directors under sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaint must contain specific and unambiguous averments that each accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the relevant time; a bare reference to directorship or general responsibility is insufficient. The Supreme Court also noted that a complainant bank could not sustain the prosecution merely by describing itself as a holder in due course where the pleaded facts did not establish an independent basis for liability. The complaint was therefore held not maintainable against the directors, and the quashing of proceedings was affirmed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113485