Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN
R.D.Sakthi – Appellant
Versus
T.S.Murali – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of complaint based on cheque issuance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding vicarious liability and cheque context. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. details of the cheque and replies related to liability. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal implications of vicarious liability under ni act. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. legal rationale for quashing the complaint. (Para 11) |
| 6. court's conclusion on quashing the prosecution. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
1. The petitioner herein is the sole accused in the private complaint initiated under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. This petition to quash the complaint is filed on the ground that the subject cheque was not issued by the petitioner from the account maintained by him in the bank to attract offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the cheque which is subject matter of the complaint in S.T.C.No:2533/2022 is drawn in favour of S.Murali T.N. Srinivasan for a sum of Rs. 8,25,000/- dated 03/02/2021. The drawer of the cheque is ‘Rose Health Care’ which is a partnership firm, in which, the petitioner is one of the partner and signed the cheque. The statuto
Liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be established against a partner without including the partnership firm as an accused.
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....
A partner cannot be held liable under Section 138 of the NI Act without the partnership firm being arraigned as an accused, reaffirming the necessity of a separate legal entity in cheque dishonour ca....
There is a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act that there exists a legally enforceable debt or liability.
For partners to incur vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instrument Act, the partnership firm must first be convicted of the offense; absence of firm conviction precludes individual partner lia....
Negotiable instruments – Quash of criminal proceedings against one of the Director - petitioner was only a partner of the firm which has issued the cheque and she was not responsible for the conduct ....
A non-signatory to a cheque cannot be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheque bounce, as liability is limited to the cheque's drawer.
Prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not maintainable against signatories of a cheque unless the firm, as the drawer, is also arraigned as an accused.
Complaint under S.138/141 NI Act quashed for failure to implead/notice partnership firm and partners.
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
