2018 (12) TMI 956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....moned by the Metropolitan Magistrate, vide order dated 17.01.2015, on the accusations of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'N.I.Act') having been committed qua a cheque drawn against the account of company M/s. Vision Pipes Pvt. Ltd. in which these petitioners along with one Pradeep Mittal were described as the Directors, their liability in respect of said offence having been alleged on the basis of vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners were shown in the said criminal complaint case as accused nos. 3,4 and 5, the cheque indisputably having been issued against the account of the said company (also an accused) under the signature of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd responsible for the day-to-day affairs and conduct of the business of the accused No.1.... 18. The above mentioned cheque was issued by the accused No.1 in partial discharge of the above mentioned liability towards the complainant. The accused Nos.2,3,4 and 5 being directors of the accused No.1, are accountable and responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the accused No.1. Thus, all the accused are fully liable and responsible for the said action of failure to discharge the liability and hence committed office(sic) offence under the Negotiable Instrument Act." 5. It is also fairly stated that other than the above, there are no averments in the criminal complaint vis-à-vis the petitioners, nor any documents relied upon would sho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e person (who is sought to be prosecuted) in favour of the complainant must be followed by a notice of demand within the stipulated period. It is the non-payment of the amount of the cheque within the statutory period after service of the notice of demand which constitutes the offence that is punishable under the aforementioned provision of law." 8. In the context of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, this court having noticed the rulings of the Supreme Court in SMS Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (supra); Gunmala Sales (P) Ltd. (supra) and Standard Chartered Bank (supra) culled out the principles as under:- "14. The guiding principles with reference to Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which are now well se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ms of Section 141, there being no need for further particulars to be given in the complaint about his role, this being subject to proof at the trial; (vi). The person who has been summoned as an accused for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on the basis of averment that he was director of the company accused, he being in charge of or responsible for the conduct of its business cannot get the complaint quashed by the High Court by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 merely on the ground that no particulars as to his role have been set out in the complaint; and (vii). The person who has been summoned as an accused for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrume....