Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
KARAMJIT SINGH
Yashpal Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sandeep Goyal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Karamjit Singh, J. (Oral)
Since all these petitions involve common question(s) of law, besides having common prayer(s), therefore, all the petitions are being disposed of through a common order.
2. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being extracted from CRM-M-1238-2020. In the instant petition, petitioner has sought relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.1009/2017 titled as Sandeep Goyal Vs. Shakti Bhog Foods Limited and others under Section 138 NI Act (Annexure P-4), summoning order dated 03.11.2017 (Annexure P-5), and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom including order dated 23.07.2019 (Annexure P-9) whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking his discharge was dismissed by the learned trial Court.
3. CRM-M-30648-2020 is filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.1012/2017 titled as Sandeep Goyal Vs. Shakti Bhog Foods Limited and others under Section 138 NI Act (Annexure P-4), summoning order dated 03.11.2017 (Annexure P-5), and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
4. CRM-M-32340-2021 is filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.1017/2017 titled as
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....
Specific averments are necessary to establish the liability of a Director under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; mere designation is insufficient.
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.
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 who resigns before a cheque is issued cannot be held liable for its dishonour, supported by public documents proving 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.
A Director who resigns before the issuance of cheques cannot be held liable under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, requiring necessary averments in complaints for vicarious liability.
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
