Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J
Kamal Sarma S/o Late Sutiman Sarma – Appellant
Versus
K.D.C. Bonded Warehouse Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
Heard Mr. B.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.K. Kothari, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, 1973, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the proceedings in C.R. Case No. 1220/2017 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , (hereinafter referred to as st the “N.I. Act”) pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1 Class, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati as well as the Order dated 24.04.2017, whereby cognizance was taken against the petitioner as well as the other accused underSection 138 of the N.I. Act, so far the petitioner is concerned.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent filed a complaint case being Complaint Case No. 1220/2017 before the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Magistrate Court’) under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against Junbeli Dhaba, Jagiroad, the petitioner and Smt. Seema Sarma alleging inter alia that Smt. Seema Sarma had issued a cheque amounting to Rs. 8,94,787/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Seven) only towards discharge of liability in favour of the resp
Specific averments are essential in a complaint to establish vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; mere assertions are insufficient.
Specific averments regarding a director's role and responsibility are essential for vicarious liability under Section 141 of the N.I. Act; mere designation is insufficient.
Directors can only be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act if specific averments are made in the complaint regarding their responsibility for the company's cond....
A Company Secretary, who is not involved in the day-to-day affairs of the company and is not responsible for the conduct of its business, cannot be held criminally liable for a dishonored cheque issu....
A complaint under Section 138 must contain specific averments to establish vicarious liability; mere title or position is insufficient for liability. Absence of allegations against an accused leads t....
(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....
Vicarious liability under Section 141 of the N.I. Act arises only when the company or firm commits the offense as the primary offender, and the accused must be the drawer of the cheque to be held lia....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific averments and unimpeachable evidence to establish vicarious liability of directors in cases of cheque bounce under Sec....
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
