https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416727 A director's vicarious liability in a prosecution under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on a specific averment that she was in charge of and responsible for the company's business when the offence occurred. At the process stage, the complaint is tested for a prima facie case on its allegations and supporting material; mere designation as a director is insufficient, but a basic assertion of responsibility for day-to-day affairs can sustain summoning unless unimpeachable material shows otherwise. On that basis, quashing of the summoning order was not justified, and the proceedings against the director were directed to continue. en-us Tue, 21 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Sep 2025 15:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416727 A director's vicarious liability in a prosecution under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on a specific averment that she was in charge of and responsible for the company's business when the offence occurred. At the process stage, the complaint is tested for a prima facie case on its allegations and supporting material; mere designation as a director is insufficient, but a basic assertion of responsibility for day-to-day affairs can sustain summoning unless unimpeachable material shows otherwise. On that basis, quashing of the summoning order was not justified, and the proceedings against the director were directed to continue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416727