https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785751 Parallel pursuit of a revision and quashing petitions over the same summoning order was treated as non-candid and a relevant objection against interference. In prosecutions under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaints disclosed a prima facie case of vicarious liability where the statutory averments under Section 141 were made and the directors' roles were indicated by the transaction documents. Deletion of the cheque signatory did not extinguish the company's liability or the liability of other persons in charge. Defences of fraud, lack of authority, security cheque, and absence of legally enforceable debt were held to raise triable issues requiring evidence, not quashing at the threshold. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jan 2026 08:55:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785751 Parallel pursuit of a revision and quashing petitions over the same summoning order was treated as non-candid and a relevant objection against interference. In prosecutions under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaints disclosed a prima facie case of vicarious liability where the statutory averments under Section 141 were made and the directors' roles were indicated by the transaction documents. Deletion of the cheque signatory did not extinguish the company's liability or the liability of other persons in charge. Defences of fraud, lack of authority, security cheque, and absence of legally enforceable debt were held to raise triable issues requiring evidence, not quashing at the threshold. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785751