<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (3) TMI 1845 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295802</link>
    <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against an ex-Director cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC where the complaint pleads that he was actively managing the company and jointly responsible for its affairs when the cheques were issued. Resignation and Form No. 32 documents were disputed and did not conclusively establish when his association with the company ended. Because the question whether he remained in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business required evidence, the High Court should not decide contested facts at the quashing stage. The complaint was therefore not quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:33:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1845 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295802</link>
      <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against an ex-Director cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC where the complaint pleads that he was actively managing the company and jointly responsible for its affairs when the cheques were issued. Resignation and Form No. 32 documents were disputed and did not conclusively establish when his association with the company ended. Because the question whether he remained in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business required evidence, the High Court should not decide contested facts at the quashing stage. The complaint was therefore not quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>