https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761125 Delhi HC dismissed petition challenging summoning order in dishonour of cheque case. Petitioner, a company director, claimed she was housewife uninvolved in company affairs and not authorized signatory. Court held Section 482 CrPC quashing power must be exercised sparingly, only in rarest cases with patently absurd allegations. Under Section 141 NI Act, directors are vicariously liable unless they prove offence occurred without their knowledge or they weren't responsible for company affairs. Since petitioner was one of only three directors without designation as independent/non-executive director, court found her contentions required trial determination rather than pre-trial quashing. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 09:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761125 Delhi HC dismissed petition challenging summoning order in dishonour of cheque case. Petitioner, a company director, claimed she was housewife uninvolved in company affairs and not authorized signatory. Court held Section 482 CrPC quashing power must be exercised sparingly, only in rarest cases with patently absurd allegations. Under Section 141 NI Act, directors are vicariously liable unless they prove offence occurred without their knowledge or they weren't responsible for company affairs. Since petitioner was one of only three directors without designation as independent/non-executive director, court found her contentions required trial determination rather than pre-trial quashing. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761125