https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274968 The court held that the directors who had resigned before the issuance of cheques could not be held liable for the transactions. As they were not in charge of the company at the relevant time, they were not responsible for the business conduct and could not be vicariously liable under Sections 138, 141, and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court deemed the certified copies of Form No.32 as admissible evidence, confirming the resignation dates of the directors. Consequently, the criminal proceedings against the directors were quashed, and the petitions allowed. en-us Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Sep 2018 16:42:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274968 The court held that the directors who had resigned before the issuance of cheques could not be held liable for the transactions. As they were not in charge of the company at the relevant time, they were not responsible for the business conduct and could not be vicariously liable under Sections 138, 141, and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court deemed the certified copies of Form No.32 as admissible evidence, confirming the resignation dates of the directors. Consequently, the criminal proceedings against the directors were quashed, and the petitions allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274968