Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
BRIJ RAJ SINGH
Sonali Verma – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applications for quashing criminal proceedings based on section 138. (Para 1 , 4 , 26) |
| 2. partners' roles in firm and criminal liability. (Para 5 , 10 , 18) |
| 3. legal distinction in liability between partnerships and corporations. (Para 15 , 19 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Both applications have been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case Nos.925 of 2022 and 926 of 2022, M/s Kalpana Industries Vs. M/s K.D. Overseas and others, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short ‘the Act, 1881’) as well as the summoning orders dated 01.06.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Unnao.
3. Brief facts of the case, in nut shell, are that applicants had entered into a partnership deed dated 01.05.2016 for carrying on business under the name and style of “M/s K.D. Overseas” situated at Neelu Kheri, District Karnal, Haryana. The object of the partnership was to engage in the business of growing, cultivating, producing, manufacturing, trading, processing, purifying, renting, purchasing, selling, blending, importing, exporting, rendering marketable and transportable (whether in bulk, packed or concentrated form) variou
Partners in a partnership can be held jointly and severally liable for business transactions; mere association does not imply vicarious liability without specific allegations.
Partners in a partnership firm are jointly and severally liable under the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheques, and mere designation does not incur liability without stated managerial i....
Partners of a firm are jointly and severally liable for cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act, irrespective of whether a partner has formally resigned, as long as they were part of the....
Clear and specific averments are necessary in criminal complaints under N.I. Act to hold individuals vicariously liable; mere association with a firm or vague allegations are insufficient.
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.
A partner cannot be held liable under Section 138 of the NI Act without the partnership firm being arraigned as an accused, reaffirming the necessity of a separate legal entity in cheque dishonour ca....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – For fastening criminal liability, there is no legal requirement for complainant to show that accused partner of firm was aware about each and every tran....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Vicarious liability in criminal law in terms of Section 141 of NI Act cannot be fastened because of civil liability.(2) Dishonour of cheque – Vicarious liability arises only....
Prosecution against a partner of a partnership firm under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not maintainable without including the firm as an accused, affirming the principle of vicarious liability.
There is a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act that there exists a legally enforceable debt or 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
