https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366660 A former director sought quashing of a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint on the basis of resignation and alleged absence of averments attracting vicarious liability under Section 141. The Court held that the resignation document was not an unimpeachable ground for quashing because its acceptance and filing details raised factual doubt, and the complaint contained specific allegations linking the petitioner to the transaction and the company's affairs. In Section 482 CrPC proceedings, prima facie pleadings cannot be treated as contrived or bypassed without trial. The complaint was therefore permitted to proceed against the petitioner. en-us Wed, 25 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Sep 2018 08:07:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366660 A former director sought quashing of a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint on the basis of resignation and alleged absence of averments attracting vicarious liability under Section 141. The Court held that the resignation document was not an unimpeachable ground for quashing because its acceptance and filing details raised factual doubt, and the complaint contained specific allegations linking the petitioner to the transaction and the company's affairs. In Section 482 CrPC proceedings, prima facie pleadings cannot be treated as contrived or bypassed without trial. The complaint was therefore permitted to proceed against the petitioner. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366660