Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Prabh Jyoti Singh – Appellant
Versus
Steel Kart Through Its Proprietor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harpreet Singh Brar, J.
1. This common order shall dispose of all the abovementioned petitions as they arise from similar factual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CRM-M-44594-2023.
2. The present petition has been preferred under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of complaint bearing No.NACT No. 59849 of 2022 dated 20.10.2022, titled as "M/s. Steel Kart vs M/s. Bird Machines Private Limited", under Sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter 'NI Act') as well as summoning order dated 11.11.2022(Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad.
3. Briefly, the facts, as alleged, are that the respondent-complainant is in the business of sale and purchase of iron and steel goods with accused company i.e. M/s Bird Machine Pvt. Ltd. The accused, including the petitioners, being the directors of the said company came to the office of the respondent for quality and quantity inspection before taking delivery of the ordered goods. The goods were delivered by the complainant on assurance of payment by the accused. In order to discharge t
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....
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....
A director's liability for dishonored cheques under the Negotiable Instruments Act is contingent upon their active management role at the time of issuance.
Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – It may not be proper to split while reading complaint so as to come to a conclusion that allegations as a whole are not sufficient to fulfil requirement of ....
Directors cannot be held vicariously liable for a company's dishonoured cheque without specific allegations of their involvement in the company's operations, as required under Section 141 of the N.I.....
The duty of the complainant to make specific averments to establish vicarious liability and the need for a liberal construction of the complaint to determine the sufficiency of the allegations.
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
