Back
JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Bhupinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Sohan Lal Mohan Lal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the complaint and background facts (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding petitioner's liability (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court’s observations on the role of directors and statutory evidence. (Para 9) |
| 4. court's analysis on directorship and liability (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. conclusion on quashing the complaint against petitioner (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.
CRM-40050-2023
The present application has been filed by the applicant-petitioner for placing on record the Annual Report of the company dated 30.09.2015 as Annexure A-1.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the Annual Report of the company dated 30.09.2015 as Annexure A-1 is taken on record.
CRM-M-24943-2021
The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of Criminal Complaint No.NACT/728/2018 dated 02.07.2018 (Annexure P1), the summoning order dated 04.08.2018 under Section 138 of the NI Act (Annexure P3), the order dated 08.03.2021 (Annexure P4) whereby the application along with the revision petition filed by the petitioner stands dismissed and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
2. The brief facts of the case as ema
A director who resigns before a cheque is issued cannot be held liable for its dishonour, supported by public documents proving resignation.
A director who resigns before the cheque issuance cannot be held liable under Sections 138 and 141 of the NI Act, evidenced by credible documents demonstrating resignation.
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 who have resigned cannot be held liable for cheques issued after their resignation unless specific allegations of responsibility are made.
Liability under Section 141 of NI Act depends on the role in the conduct of the company's affairs, not just the designation, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to establish lack of knowledge....
A director cannot be held vicariously liable for a company's actions after resignation unless specific allegations of involvement are made in the complaint.
Specific averments are necessary to establish the liability of a Director under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; mere designation is insufficient.
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
