https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341222 A cheque dishonour complaint against a director was not quashed because the complaint, read as a whole, disclosed a sufficient foundation for vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, exact reproduction of statutory wording is not essential if the substance of the allegations shows that the person was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. The complaint contained several references to the director's involvement in the company's affairs and the transaction underlying the cheque, so the absence of a verbatim averment was not fatal. The challenge to quash the complaint therefore failed. en-us Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:02:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341222 A cheque dishonour complaint against a director was not quashed because the complaint, read as a whole, disclosed a sufficient foundation for vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, exact reproduction of statutory wording is not essential if the substance of the allegations shows that the person was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. The complaint contained several references to the director's involvement in the company's affairs and the transaction underlying the cheque, so the absence of a verbatim averment was not fatal. The challenge to quash the complaint therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341222