SANJAY KAROL, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Saroj Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL, J.
Leave Granted.
2. The appellant is aggrieved by the High Court of Delhi’s refusal to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in terms of order dated 7th August 2025 passed and Criminal MC No.8110/2023 and Criminal M.A. No.30210/2023 to quash the summoning order issued by the Metropolitan Magistrate, in connection with complaint CC NI Act 12597/2021 under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 18811[‘NI Act’], as confirmed as a consequence of the dismissal of CR No. 115/2023 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka Courts .
3. The facts of the matter are that the appellant is one of the Directors of the accused Company namely Projtech Engineering Private Limited. The accused Company issued cheques, three in number, all dated 20th April 2021worth 15 lacs, 20 lacs and 15 lacs each, as payment for supply of iron and steel. Despite confirmation from the accused Company of availability of funds at the time of deposit of cheques, the same were returned unpaid. The reason therefor was:
Legal notice in this connection was
N. Vijay Kumar v. Vishwanath Rao N.
S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla
Gunmala Sales (P) Ltd. v. Anu Mehta
Hitesh Verma v. Health Care at Home (India) (P) Ltd.
K.S. Mehta v. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.
Krishnan & Anr. v. Krishnaveni & Anr.
Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra
V.C Shukla v. State through CBI
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – Every member of Board of Directors is not expected to be aware of all decisions taken in everyday transactions that are involved in running a business c....
For maintaining a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, arraigning of the company as an accused is imperative. The person in charge of the company cannot be held liable if ....
The company must be summoned as an accused in Section 138 N.I. Act cases for proceedings against its Directors to be valid.
(1) Dishonour of cheque – A post-dated cheque issued after debt has been incurred would be covered by definition of ‘debt’ – However, if sum payable depends on a contingent event, then it takes colou....
A Director who resigns before the issuance of cheques cannot be held liable under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, requiring necessary averments in complaints for vicarious liability.
Directors and company secretary can be held liable under Section 138 and 141 of the NI Act if they are responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the company or if their negligence, connivance, or con....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Impleadment of all Directors of Accused Company on the basis of a statement that they are in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of company, without anything m....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.