Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
BRIJ RAJ SINGH
Rajiv Gupta Complaint Case – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. clubbing similar s.482 crpc quashing applications under ni act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. directors' vicarious liability requires company as accused under s.141. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. managing directors presumed in charge of company affairs. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. aneeta hada: company prosecution mandatory for vicarious liability. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. distinguishing precedents lacking company as accused. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. quashing proceedings against directors without impleading company. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
1. Since these applications raise common questions of law and fact, therefore, the same are being decided by a common judgment.
2. Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. Nos.4766 of 2012, 4762 of 2012, 4763 of 2012, 4764 of 2012, 4765 of 2012, 4767 of 2012, 4768 of 2012, 4769 of 2012 and 4770 of 2012 were filed by the applicant-Rajiv Gupta, seeking quashing of the orders dated 23.1.2012, 10.7.2012, 23.1.2012, 23.1.2012, 23.1.2012, 23.1.2012, 19.3.2012, 28.2.2012 and 23.1.2012 respectively passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.28, District Lucknow in Complaint Case nos.41 of 2012, 1109 of 2012, 28 of 2012, 3044 o
Prosecution of company is mandatory condition precedent under Section 141 NI Act for vicarious liability of directors; complaints against directors quashed without impleading company.
Maintaining prosecution under section 138 of the NI Act requires arraigning the company as an accused, and the vicarious liability of individuals associated with the company is contingent upon the co....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of arraigning the company as an accused for maintaining the prosecution under Section 141 of the NI Act, and the requirement of speci....
The company must be summoned as an accused in Section 138 N.I. Act cases for proceedings against its Directors to be valid.
Vicarious liability under Section 141 of the N.I. Act arises only when the company or firm commits the offense as the primary offender, and the accused must be the drawer of the cheque to be held lia....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of impleading the company as an accused for maintaining the prosecution under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments act, 1881.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a complaint filed by a company under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be in the name of the company and can be represented b....
(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....
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
