https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293386 In cheque dishonour prosecutions against a company, a complaint need only lay a prima facie factual foundation showing the statutory ingredients; detailed proof of each director's role is not required at the threshold, and persons in charge of the company may be proceeded against under the deeming provision. Territorial jurisdiction may lie where a legally relevant part of the transaction occurred, including where goods were supplied and payment became due after notice. On these principles, the Gujarat HC rejected the challenge to the criminal process, upheld jurisdiction at Vadodara, and directed the trial to proceed. en-us Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2021 17:14:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293386 In cheque dishonour prosecutions against a company, a complaint need only lay a prima facie factual foundation showing the statutory ingredients; detailed proof of each director's role is not required at the threshold, and persons in charge of the company may be proceeded against under the deeming provision. Territorial jurisdiction may lie where a legally relevant part of the transaction occurred, including where goods were supplied and payment became due after notice. On these principles, the Gujarat HC rejected the challenge to the criminal process, upheld jurisdiction at Vadodara, and directed the trial to proceed. Case-Laws Companies Law Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293386