https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794754 A complaint seeking prosecution of a director under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must contain clear and specific averments that the director was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the company's business. General statements about day-to-day management, without particulars of the director's role in the cheque transaction, issuance, execution, or dishonour, are insufficient. Mere designation as a director does not satisfy Section 141, which requires conjunctive and foundational pleadings identifying responsibility for the offence. On the pleaded facts, continuation of the prosecution was treated as an abuse of process and the proceeding against the petitioner was liable to be quashed. en-us Thu, 09 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jul 2026 08:46:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794754 A complaint seeking prosecution of a director under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must contain clear and specific averments that the director was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the company's business. General statements about day-to-day management, without particulars of the director's role in the cheque transaction, issuance, execution, or dishonour, are insufficient. Mere designation as a director does not satisfy Section 141, which requires conjunctive and foundational pleadings identifying responsibility for the offence. On the pleaded facts, continuation of the prosecution was treated as an abuse of process and the proceeding against the petitioner was liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794754