https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197243 Proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not be quashed under Section 482 CrPC merely because the accused disputed that the cheques were issued towards an existing liability; where the complaint otherwise disclosed the ingredients of the offence, that defence had to be tested at trial. Prosecution was also unsustainable against petitioners 2 and 3, as they were neither drawers of the dishonoured cheques nor within the statutory vicarious liability framework of Section 141. The first petitioner, who had drawn the cheques as proprietor of the concern, remained liable to face trial, and the absence of a separate arraignment of the proprietary concern did not defeat the complaint. en-us Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Dec 2017 18:54:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197243 Proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not be quashed under Section 482 CrPC merely because the accused disputed that the cheques were issued towards an existing liability; where the complaint otherwise disclosed the ingredients of the offence, that defence had to be tested at trial. Prosecution was also unsustainable against petitioners 2 and 3, as they were neither drawers of the dishonoured cheques nor within the statutory vicarious liability framework of Section 141. The first petitioner, who had drawn the cheques as proprietor of the concern, remained liable to face trial, and the absence of a separate arraignment of the proprietary concern did not defeat the complaint. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197243