https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303057 Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not sustain vicarious liability against directors under Section 141 unless it contained specific averments that they were in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time, or that they acted with knowledge, consent, connivance, or negligence. A bare assertion that the accused were directors was insufficient, and deficiencies in the complaint itself could not be cured by the sworn statement or accompanying material. In proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the High Court could quash the prosecution where the statutory ingredients were not made out and continuation would amount to abuse of process. en-us Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jul 2022 18:12:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303057 Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not sustain vicarious liability against directors under Section 141 unless it contained specific averments that they were in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time, or that they acted with knowledge, consent, connivance, or negligence. A bare assertion that the accused were directors was insufficient, and deficiencies in the complaint itself could not be cured by the sworn statement or accompanying material. In proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the High Court could quash the prosecution where the statutory ingredients were not made out and continuation would amount to abuse of process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303057