<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (11) TMI 78 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334060</link>
    <description>Vicarious criminal liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act attaches only to persons who were in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business at the relevant time, and it must be strictly construed. On the facts stated, one petitioner became an additional director only after the cheques were issued, so no link to issuance could be shown. For the other petitioner, the complaint material did not disclose any specific act or conduct attracting criminal liability, and the dispute appeared at best civil in nature. The text states that the magistrate did not examine these material facts before issuing process, making the summoning order unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2016 09:32:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 78 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334060</link>
      <description>Vicarious criminal liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act attaches only to persons who were in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business at the relevant time, and it must be strictly construed. On the facts stated, one petitioner became an additional director only after the cheques were issued, so no link to issuance could be shown. For the other petitioner, the complaint material did not disclose any specific act or conduct attracting criminal liability, and the dispute appeared at best civil in nature. The text states that the magistrate did not examine these material facts before issuing process, making the summoning order unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>