https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238440 For vicarious criminal liability of company directors in a cheque dishonour prosecution, the complaint must specifically or by necessary implication aver that the accused was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Mere designation as a director, or an allegation that directors were only consulted in business affairs, is insufficient. On the facts stated, the complaint indicated that business and financial affairs were administered by others and that the accused were only consulted, so the statutory foundation for fastening liability was absent. The proceedings against the accused were therefore liable to be quashed. en-us Thu, 17 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jul 2022 15:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238440 For vicarious criminal liability of company directors in a cheque dishonour prosecution, the complaint must specifically or by necessary implication aver that the accused was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Mere designation as a director, or an allegation that directors were only consulted in business affairs, is insufficient. On the facts stated, the complaint indicated that business and financial affairs were administered by others and that the accused were only consulted, so the statutory foundation for fastening liability was absent. The proceedings against the accused were therefore liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 17 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238440