Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Rakhidevi Umashankar Agarwal W/O Umashankar Shyamlal Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Religare Finvest Ltd – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application under section 482 (Para 1) |
| 2. case of the complainant (Para 2) |
| 3. knowledge of one and all (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. applicant is one of the directors (Para 6) |
| 5. dispute between two private persons (Para 7) |
| 6. the only question that falls (Para 8) |
| 7. requirements of section 141 (Para 9) |
| 8. the liability under section 141 (Para 10) |
| 9. the applicant accused no.3 (Para 11) |
| 10. the present application is required (Para 12) |
ORDER :
1. 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 o
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.
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....
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....
A director cannot be held vicariously liable for a company's actions after resignation unless specific allegations of involvement are made in the complaint.
An individual in a company cannot be vicariously liable for criminal offenses under the NI Act unless they are responsible for the company's conduct at the time of the offense.
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....
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.
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
