https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752404 In prosecutions under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the High Court will not quash summoning orders under Section 482 CrPC at the threshold where the complaint contains the basic averment that the accused was responsible for the company's business. A plea of resignation, non-remuneration, or absence from business premises is insufficient unless supported by unimpeachable material showing the accused could not have been concerned with the transaction. An Executive Director and Promoter may ordinarily be treated as having control over the company's affairs for the purpose of process, and disputed questions about actual role or internal functioning must be left to trial. en-us Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2024 07:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752404 In prosecutions under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the High Court will not quash summoning orders under Section 482 CrPC at the threshold where the complaint contains the basic averment that the accused was responsible for the company's business. A plea of resignation, non-remuneration, or absence from business premises is insufficient unless supported by unimpeachable material showing the accused could not have been concerned with the transaction. An Executive Director and Promoter may ordinarily be treated as having control over the company's affairs for the purpose of process, and disputed questions about actual role or internal functioning must be left to trial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752404