Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
Bhupinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Sohan Lal Mohan Lal & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M No.24943 of 2021 (O&M)
Decided on : 26-09-2023
| 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 emanating from the pleadings are that the complainant firm (M/s.Sohan Lal Mohan Lal, Commission Agents, Talwandi Bhai Tehsil and District Ferozpur through its partner Sh.Vijay Kumar son of Mohan Lal) had been supplying paddy/basmati on credit to the accused firm of which accused No.1 (Bhupinder Kaur, Director of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot) and accused No.2 (Sukhveer Singh Samra, Director of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot) were the Directors and accused No.5 (Harinder Singh Samra, Authorised Signatory of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot) was an authorised signatory in the banks of the accused company. Over a period of time, an amount of Rs.58,08,350.95/- became due on the part of the accused Firm. In partial discharge of their liability, the accused issued a Cheque No.889782 dated 20.01.2018 for an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-favouring the Complainant firm from their Company's Account No.0978002100359107 at the Punjab National Bank, Main Bazar Faridkot with the assurance that the said cheque would be honoured. However, the cheque in question was dishonoured with the remarks `Funds Insufficient'. A legal notice was sent to the accused making a demand of the payment of the cheque amount. However, no reply was furnished to the said legal notice.
3. Thereafter, the complaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Banking Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 came to be instituted at the instance of the complainant No.1/respondent No.1-firm M/s.Sohan Lal Mohan Lal, Commission Agents, Talwandi through its partner Vijay Kumar (complainant No.2/respondent No.2) against Bhupinder Kaur, Director of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. (petitioner) Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot, Sukhveer Singh Samra, Director of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot, Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot through its Director Bhupinder Kaur, Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot through its Director Sukhveer Singh Samra and Harinder Singh Samra, Authorised Signatory of Golden Agrarian Pvt. Ltd. Sadik Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot. The copy of the complaint dated 02.07.2018 is attached as Annexure P1 to the petition.
4. Based on the aforementioned complaint dated 02.07.2018 (Annexure P1), the summoning order was passed on 04.08.2018 under Section 138 of the NI Act. A copy of the said order is attached as Annexure P3 to the petition.
5. Against the aforementioned summoning order, a revision petition was preferred which came to be dismissed. A copy of the order dated 08.03.2021 p
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
