https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92192 SC allowed the appeal and quashed all proceedings against the appellants. The Court held that a body corporate must be impleaded before prosecuting its directors or officers on vicarious liability grounds; prosecution of officers alone is impermissible where the company (the Bank) was not accused. Absent unimpeachable material establishing each appellant's direct role, authorization, or deliberate omission linking them to the alleged offence, mere designation or bald assertions of vicarious liability cannot sustain issuance of process. The impugned High Court and Magistrate orders were set aside, Complaint No. 6353 of 2007 was quashed in entirety, and appellants were held entitled to statutory protection under the applicable enactment for acts done in good faith. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 2025 08:40:36 +0530 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 08:40:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92192 SC allowed the appeal and quashed all proceedings against the appellants. The Court held that a body corporate must be impleaded before prosecuting its directors or officers on vicarious liability grounds; prosecution of officers alone is impermissible where the company (the Bank) was not accused. Absent unimpeachable material establishing each appellant's direct role, authorization, or deliberate omission linking them to the alleged offence, mere designation or bald assertions of vicarious liability cannot sustain issuance of process. The impugned High Court and Magistrate orders were set aside, Complaint No. 6353 of 2007 was quashed in entirety, and appellants were held entitled to statutory protection under the applicable enactment for acts done in good faith. Highlights Indian Laws Thu, 04 Sep 2025 08:40:36 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92192