TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 851
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st the present petitioners as accused Nos.5, 7 and 8 and accused No.1-Reliable Finance Infra Agro Ltd., of which the present petitioners are Directors and four others. The allegation is that accused No.1- Reliable Finance Infra Agro Ltd., is an Insurance Company dealing with various types of Insurance policies and accused No.2 was the Chairman of the said company and the present petitioners and rest of the accused are all Directors of the same. The further allegation is that on 28/7/2015, an Insurance policy was issued in favour of the complainant with sum assured for Rs. 5,00,000/- with further assurance that he would be paid Rs. 97,500/- per year for a period of five years. Accordingly, respondent received a cheque bearing No.000093 for R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petition papers. It is signed only by accused No.2. The signatures of the present petitioners does not appear on the same. There is no allegation in the entire complaint that the present petitioners were either incharge of the Administration/Business of the company or that they are signatories to the cheque in question. Under such circumstances, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 18 and 19 in S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals LTd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla and Another reported in (2005) 8 SCC 89 which is reiterated in Shailendra Swarup vs. Deputy Director AIR 2020 3890, complaint insofar as the present petitioners is liable to be quashed. Para Nos.18 and 19 of the S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals LTd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla and Another rea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fically aver in a complaint under Section 141 that at the time the offence was committed, the person accused was in charge of, and responsible for the conduct of business of the company. This averment is an essential requirement of Section 141 and has to be made in a complaint. Without this averment being made in a complaint, the requirements of Section 141 cannot be said to be satisfied. (b) The answer to the question posed in sub-para has to be in the negative. Merely being a director of a company is not sufficient to make the person liable under Section 141 of the Act. A director in a company cannot be deemed to be in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of its business. The requirement of Section 141 is that the pe....