Back
DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Rakhidevi Umashankar Agarwal W/o Umashankar Shyamlal Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Religare Finvest Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER (ORAL)
By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused No.3 seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the proceedings of the Criminal Case No.2986 of 2017 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad Rural for the offence punishable under Sections-138 of N.I. Act.
2. The case of the complainant can be summarized as under:-
2.1 It is the specific case of the complainant that the complainant is the finance company registered as per the rules and regulations of the RBI as well as Government and engaged in the activities of providing finance to the needy persons. The accused persons have approached the office of the complainant and demanded loan of Rs.23,73,500/- and at that relevant point of time, the accused persons signed the agreement and cheque was issued by the accused persons in favour of the complainant and also, given oral assurance that as and when the cheque was deposited in the bank, in that event, the cheque would be hounoured. It is the case of the complainant that when the cheque bearing No.974621 of Canara Bank was presented in the bank, at that time, th
Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – If person responsible to company for conduct of business of company, was not in charge of conduct of business of company, then he can be made liable only if....
A director who has resigned prior to the issuance of a cheque cannot be held vicariously liable for its dishonor under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
Vicarious liability under Section 141(1) of the NI Act must be strictly construed, and the complaint should provide specific averments to establish the accused's responsibility for the company's cond....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – For fastening criminal liability, there is no legal requirement for complainant to show that accused partner of firm was aware about each and every tran....
A director cannot be held vicariously liable for a company's actions after resignation unless specific allegations of involvement are made in the complaint.
Liability of directors under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on their active role and responsibility for the company's business conduct, not merely their directorship.
Sufficient averments in a complaint against a director fulfill requirements of Section 141 of the NI Act for vicarious liability. Failure to respond to statutory notices under Section 138 infers liab....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
