https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303158 The Court quashed the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to the lack of specific averments against the petitioner and failure to establish vicarious liability. The Court emphasized the requirement for specific allegations to establish vicarious liability, particularly for directors or officers of a company, stating that mere designation without clear involvement in the company's affairs is insufficient to establish liability. The judgment highlighted the necessity of proving vicarious liability with specific averments, leading to the quashing of the complaint case under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for improper order taking cognizance of the offense. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jul 2022 22:00:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303158 The Court quashed the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to the lack of specific averments against the petitioner and failure to establish vicarious liability. The Court emphasized the requirement for specific allegations to establish vicarious liability, particularly for directors or officers of a company, stating that mere designation without clear involvement in the company's affairs is insufficient to establish liability. The judgment highlighted the necessity of proving vicarious liability with specific averments, leading to the quashing of the complaint case under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for improper order taking cognizance of the offense. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303158