https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440313 A quashing petition against a criminal complaint and summoning order under the SEBI Act was rejected where the complaint specifically averred that the director was in charge of and responsible to the company for its business during the relevant period. The Court held that, at the quashing stage, it would not conduct a mini trial or resolve disputed facts, and the petitioner had produced no unimpeachable material to rebut the statutory averment or show abuse of process. The question of the director's vicarious liability had to be examined at trial, so the challenge to the complaint and summoning order failed. en-us Thu, 13 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Jul 2023 08:01:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440313 A quashing petition against a criminal complaint and summoning order under the SEBI Act was rejected where the complaint specifically averred that the director was in charge of and responsible to the company for its business during the relevant period. The Court held that, at the quashing stage, it would not conduct a mini trial or resolve disputed facts, and the petitioner had produced no unimpeachable material to rebut the statutory averment or show abuse of process. The question of the director's vicarious liability had to be examined at trial, so the challenge to the complaint and summoning order failed. Case-Laws SEBI Thu, 13 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440313