https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430973 The court quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was found that the petitioner, who had resigned as a director before the dishonor of the cheques, was not responsible for the conduct of the business at the relevant time. The court emphasized that vicarious liability under section 141 can only be imposed if the individual was in charge of the company's affairs when the offense occurred. The order taking cognizance against the petitioner was set aside, allowing the trial to proceed against the company and other accused persons. en-us Wed, 16 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Dec 2022 09:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430973 The court quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was found that the petitioner, who had resigned as a director before the dishonor of the cheques, was not responsible for the conduct of the business at the relevant time. The court emphasized that vicarious liability under section 141 can only be imposed if the individual was in charge of the company's affairs when the offense occurred. The order taking cognizance against the petitioner was set aside, allowing the trial to proceed against the company and other accused persons. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430973