https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194901 A director cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution on the basis of designation alone unless the complaint specifically pleads that, at the relevant time, he was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business. The Gujarat HC found no such foundational averment, nor any overt act or factual basis to support vicarious liability, so mere office as director was insufficient to sustain the complaints. The Court treated the absence of this essential pleading as rendering the proceedings unsustainable against that accused and exercised inherent powers to prevent abuse of process, while leaving the case against the remaining accused to continue. en-us Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Oct 2017 14:35:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194901 A director cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution on the basis of designation alone unless the complaint specifically pleads that, at the relevant time, he was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business. The Gujarat HC found no such foundational averment, nor any overt act or factual basis to support vicarious liability, so mere office as director was insufficient to sustain the complaints. The Court treated the absence of this essential pleading as rendering the proceedings unsustainable against that accused and exercised inherent powers to prevent abuse of process, while leaving the case against the remaining accused to continue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194901