Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CHITTARANJAN DASH
Rajendra Swami – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the process initiated by the dishonoured cheques leads to a legal complaint. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments regarding liability and lack of notice are presented. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court examines the maintainability of the prosecution under the n.i. act. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. admissions made in prior proceedings can validate cognizance of offences. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. cognizance is upheld, and the crlmc is dismissed. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
Judgment :
1. The Petitioner, namely Rajendra Swami, Director of Right Step Media Services Private Limited, has filed this application challenging the legality of the order of cognizance dated 03.09.2016 passed by the learned S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack in connection with 1CC Case No. 746 of 2016, wherein the learned court took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and directed the Petitioner to appear and answer the accusation, initially by issuance of a bailable warrant and subsequently by issuance of an N.B.W. vide order dated 30.08.2017.
3. According to the complaint, one of the Directors, Mr. Rajendra Swami @ Rajendra Kumar Swami, requested the authorised staff, namely Mr. Manish Ahuja, of the Complainant firm
The failure to array a company as an accused in dishonour of cheque cases does not invalidate cognizance if the individual was responsible for the company's transactions.
The essential requirements for a valid complaint under Section 138 NI Act, including the demand notice to the drawer of the cheque and the arraignment of the company as the accused when the cheque is....
The liability of the company and its officers under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was established based on the specific averments in the complaint and the company's reply, and the cou....
Specific averments are essential in a complaint to establish vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; mere assertions are insufficient.
Prosecution of company is mandatory condition precedent under Section 141 NI Act for vicarious liability of directors; complaints against directors quashed without impleading company.
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....
Directors cannot be prosecuted under Section 138 of the NI Act without the company being joined as an accused, as vicarious liability requires the company to be a party to the proceedings.
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
