2014 (5) TMI 1221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court on 10-9-08 had heard the arguments of respondent No. 1 on the question of registering the complaint and had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner. The petitioner had filed an application for deleting Her name from the array of the parties but the said application was rejected by order dated 22-1-2009 on the ground that after taking the cognizance under Section 204 of Cr.P.C., there is no power with the Magistrate to review the said order. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner in the complaint....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence of such specific averments in the complaint showing as to how and in what manner the director is liable, the complaint should not be entertained. [See: Saroj Kumar Poddar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in 2007 (5) M.P.H.T. 431 (SC) : (2007) 3 SCC 693; SMS Pharmaceuticals Vs. Neeta Bhalla and another, reported in AIR 2005 SC 3512; and Sabitha Ramamurthy Vs. R.B.S. Channabasavaradhya, reported in 2006(4) M.P.H.T. 212 (SC) : AIR 2006 SC 3086]. It is also settled position in law that for launching a prosecution against the alleged directors, there must be a specific allegation in the complaint as to the part played by them in the transaction. [See: N.K. Wahi Vs. Shekhar Singh and others, reported in (2007) 9 SCC 481]. It is also necess....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... or incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 only if the requisite statements, which are required to be averred in the complaint/petition, are made so as to make the accused therein vicariously liable for offence committed by the company along with averments in the petition containing that the accused were in-charge of and responsible for the business of the company and by virtue of their position they are liable to be proceeded with. (iv) Vicarious liability on the part of a person must be pleaded and proved and not inferred. (v) If the accused is a Managing Director or a Joint Managing Director then it is not necessary to make specific averment in the complaint and by virtue of their position they are liable to be proc....