https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284665 A petition under Section 482 CrPC was held maintainable to seek quashing despite the availability of revision against the summoning order, because revision under Section 397 CrPC is limited to examining legality and propriety and does not itself provide power to quash a complaint. On vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a former director who had ceased to hold office before the cheque was issued could not be summoned unless the complaint contained specific averments showing how he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. Mere repetition of the statutory language was insufficient, and the complaint and summoning order were quashed qua that person. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:36:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284665 A petition under Section 482 CrPC was held maintainable to seek quashing despite the availability of revision against the summoning order, because revision under Section 397 CrPC is limited to examining legality and propriety and does not itself provide power to quash a complaint. On vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a former director who had ceased to hold office before the cheque was issued could not be summoned unless the complaint contained specific averments showing how he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. Mere repetition of the statutory language was insufficient, and the complaint and summoning order were quashed qua that person. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284665