https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168291 Inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings is confined to cases where the complaint, read as a whole and taken at face value, does not disclose the essential ingredients of any offence. A bare managerial designation may justify an inference of responsibility for the company's affairs and support vicarious liability, but a director cannot be proceeded against on a mere assertion that he was in charge and responsible without supporting factual averments. The proceedings were therefore held unsustainable against the directors, while the complaint against the manager was restored. The court also noted that persons not originally arrayed as accused may be proceeded against on evidence in an appropriate case. en-us Wed, 01 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2025 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168291 Inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings is confined to cases where the complaint, read as a whole and taken at face value, does not disclose the essential ingredients of any offence. A bare managerial designation may justify an inference of responsibility for the company's affairs and support vicarious liability, but a director cannot be proceeded against on a mere assertion that he was in charge and responsible without supporting factual averments. The proceedings were therefore held unsustainable against the directors, while the complaint against the manager was restored. The court also noted that persons not originally arrayed as accused may be proceeded against on evidence in an appropriate case. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168291