https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431442 The court dismissed the petitions seeking to quash summoning orders under Section 482 of the CrPC. It found the petitioner, appointed as a Non-Executive Director and Promoter, liable under Section 138 of the NI Act for dishonored cheques issued after his appointment. Emphasizing control over company affairs, the court held that criminal liability arises from actual involvement, not just designation. Referring to legal precedents and Companies Act provisions, the court rejected the petitioner's claim of non-involvement and directed him to appear before the trial court for further proceedings. en-us Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2022 09:05:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431442 The court dismissed the petitions seeking to quash summoning orders under Section 482 of the CrPC. It found the petitioner, appointed as a Non-Executive Director and Promoter, liable under Section 138 of the NI Act for dishonored cheques issued after his appointment. Emphasizing control over company affairs, the court held that criminal liability arises from actual involvement, not just designation. Referring to legal precedents and Companies Act provisions, the court rejected the petitioner's claim of non-involvement and directed him to appear before the trial court for further proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431442