Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
J.C. DOSHI
Radheshyam Dagdulal Bhomavat – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
J. C. DOSHI, J.
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent State. Though served with notice, respondent No.2 did not choose to remain present before the Court.
2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”), the applicant seeks quashing of the FIR registered as CR No.I-159 of 2014 registered with Ankleshwar GIDC Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and further proceedings arising thereof.
3. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties.
4. Seeking quashment of the FIR against the present petitioner registered for the offence punishable under Sections
406, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 420 of IPC as C.R. No.I-159 of 2014, learned advocate Mr.Nandish Thackar would submit that present petitioner is Additional Director in a category of Independent Non-executive Director and therefore, the petitioner should not be held vicariously liable for the acts and misdeeds alleged to have been committed by the company. He would further submit that role of the petitioner is minimal and lesser than the role of the Managing Director
Vicarious liability of directors requires specific allegations of personal involvement; mere designation as Non-executive Director does not absolve responsibility if active participation is establish....
Vicarious liability under Section 34 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires specific complaint averments that director/MD in charge and responsible for company business conduct; mere designation insuffi....
Directors cannot be held liable for a company's criminal acts without specific allegations of their involvement; mere directorship is insufficient for establishing vicarious liability.
Directors liable under Drugs Act Section 34 if complaint specifically avers their involvement in business conduct via emails and records, notwithstanding competent person appointment.
The court maintained that an FIR must not be quashed at an initial stage unless no prima facie case is established, even if the allegations suggest civil nature.
Liability under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires clear averments in the complaint regarding the accused's managerial responsibility; mere directorship is insufficient without evidence of control ....
The court emphasized the need for uncontroverted allegations to make out an offence for prosecution to be quashed, and the requirement for a proper investigation.
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
