Back
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Ambika Narang – Appellant
Versus
Shivam Shubham Fashions Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 read with Article 227 of Constitution of India, 1950, the petitioner seeks quashing of summoning order dated 24.04.2018 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act)-04, South-East, Saket Court, New Delhi in Criminal Complaint No. 3611/2018 titled as "M/s Shivam Shubham Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s The Aura Creation Exports Private Limited & Ors." and all its consequent proceedings, so far as it relates to the petitioner.
2. A perusal of the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act') reveals that the complainant (respondent no. 1 herein) i.e. 'M/s Shivam Shubham Fashions Pvt. Ltd.', a Private Limited Company, was having business relations with the accused no. 1 (respondent no. 2 herein) i.e. 'M/s. Aura Creation Exports Private Limited & Ors.', whose directors were accused no. 2 i.e. Tarun Narang (respondent no. 3 herein) and accused no. 3 i.e. Ambika Narang (petitioner herein). The case of complainant was that the accused company had ordered laces and embroidery items of different kind which the complainant had supplied
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timing of a director's resignation from a company and their involvement in the company's affairs, especially in the context of dishonored ....
The judgment emphasized the principles of vicarious liability under Section 141 of the NI Act and the need for material to substantiate contentions regarding non-involvement in the offense.
Directors who had resigned prior to the issuance of a dishonored cheque cannot be held liable under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and specific averments are required to esta....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the role of each accused in the commission of the offence can only be determined during the trial and cannot be examined in detail by the cour....
A director cannot be held vicariously liable for a company's actions after resignation unless specific allegations of involvement are made in the complaint.
Directors who have resigned cannot be held liable for cheques issued after their resignation unless specific allegations of responsibility are made.
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
