Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
JUVVADI SRIDEVI
L Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
Criminal Petition No.847 of 2025 – Respondent
ORDER :
Juvvadi Sridevi, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings against him by setting aside the impugned order dated 24.09.2024 passed in CRL.M.P.No.3717 of 2023 in S.T.C.NI.No.346 of 2021 on the file of the learned X Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Manoranjan Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad (for short ‘the learned trial Court’), registered for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘the NI Act’).
2. Heard Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri M.Avinash Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri K. Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for unofficial respondent No.2. Perused the material on record.
3(a). A complaint was filed under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), alleging the commission of offences under Sections 138 and 142 of the NI Act by the accused persons. The complaint was lodged by the respondent No.2 before the learned trial Court in respect of the alleged offences committed on 19.11.2020 and 08.01.2021. The gist of the private complaint is that the complainant and the accused had maintained acquaintance
Specific averments are necessary to establish the liability of a Director under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; mere designation is insufficient.
Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – For maintaining prosecution under Section 141 of NI Act, arraigning of company as an accused is imperative and non-impleadment of company would be fatal for....
Specific averments regarding a director's role and responsibility are essential for vicarious liability under Section 141 of the N.I. Act; mere designation is insufficient.
Directors can only be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act if specific averments are made in the complaint regarding their responsibility for the company's cond....
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....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Impleadment of all Directors of Accused Company on the basis of a statement that they are in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of company, without anything m....
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....
Vicarious liability under Section 141(1) of the NI Act must be strictly construed, and the complaint should provide specific averments to establish the accused's responsibility for the company's cond....
Liability of directors under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on their active role and responsibility for the company's business conduct, not merely their directorship.
Vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act requires proof of a director's active involvement and responsibility in the company's operations, not merely their title.
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
