2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 2764
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MR. ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
M/S VYAGRAH INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD. – Respondent
CRL.M.C.-206/2021
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 10th November, 2025 Pronounced on: 09th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 206/2021, CRL.M.A. 6385/2022 , CRL.M.A. 6979/2022 and CRL.M.A. 8548/2025.
1. MR. ASHWINI KUMAR SINGH NE Independent Director C/o M/s MBL Infrastructures Ltd.
At-Baani Corporate One Tower, Suite # 303, 3rd Floor, Plot No.5, District Commercial Centre, Jasola, New Delhi- 110025
2. MR. DARSHAN SINGH NEGI C/o M/s MBL Infrastructures Ltd.
At-Baani Corporate One Tower, Suite # 303, 3rd Floor, Plot No. 5, District Commercial Centre, Jasola, New Delhi- 110025
3. MS. SUNITA PALTA NE Independent Director C/o M/s MBL Infrastructures Ltd.
At-Baani Corporate One Tower Suite # 303, 3rd Floor Plot No. 5, District Commercial Centre Jasola, New Delhi- 110025
4. MR. BHAGWAN SINGH DUGGAL NE Independent Director C/o M/s MBL Infrastructures Ltd.
At-Baani Corporate One Tower Suite # 303, 3rd Floor Plot No. 5, District Commercial Centre ....Petitioners Through: Ms. Anusuya Salwan and Mr. Rachit Wadhwa, Advocates.
versus M/S VYAGRAH INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.
Through its Director Mr. Ajay Kumar Bansal Flat No. 112, Sector 16B, Vasundhara Ghaziabad (UP), PIN-201012 .....Respondent Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as „Cr.P.C‟), has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners for setting aside the Summoning Order dated 03.04.2018 passed Ld. MM in CC No.9804/2017 and quashing of CC No.9804/2017 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as „NI Act‟).
2. Brief facts are that Respondent/Complainant, M/s Vyagrah Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. had filed CC No.9804/2017 under Section 138 NI Act against the Petitioners in respect of alleged dishonour of Cheque No.315005 dated 25.04.2017 for Rs.21,90,905/- drawn on Yes Bank, South Extension, New Delhi, due to „insufficiency of funds‟.
3. Ld. MM, vide Order dated 03.04.2018, took cognizance of the said Complaint and summoned the Petitioners, among other accused and directed them to appear on 01.08.2018. On the next date of hearing, i.e. 01.08.2018, it was noticed that summons had not been issued against the Petitioners herein and summons were again directed to be issued on that day.
4. Accused Nos.1 and 2/M/s MBL Infrastructures Limited and Mr. Anjanee Kumar Lakhotia therein, were the Company and its Managing Director. Accused No.1 Company appeared before the Court of Ld. MM at the first instance, on 07.09.2018 through its counsel and authorized representative namely, Dushyant Singh. Accused No.2 also appeared in response to the summons in the Complaint Case.
5. Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. was framed against him, to which, he pleaded not guilty.
6. Petitioners have challenged Summoning Order and the Complainant against them on the ground that they are neither the Managing Director nor Signatory to the Cheque in question. Moreover, in the absence of necessary and mandatory averments of „in charge of, and responsible for the conduct of business of the company‟ which is sine qua non for the vicarious liability under Section 141 NI Act, Petitioners have been wrongly summoned in the present case.
7. Reliance is placed on S.M.S. Pharma vs. Neeta Bhalla, (2005) 8 SCC 89; National Small Industries Corporation vs. Harmeet Singh Paintal and Anr., (2010) 3 SCC 330; and State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors., 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.
8. It is further submitted that Petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4, namely, Mr. Ashwini Kumar Singh, Ms. Sunita Palta and Mr. Bhagwan Singh Duggal are Non-Executive and Independent Directors of the Accused Company. Petitioner No.2/Mr. Darshan Singh Negi has been erroneously described, in the Memo of Parties, as a Director, while he is the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Company. Therefore, their roles, as statutorily defined under Companies Act, 2013, do not sustain summoning.
9. An Independent, Non-Ex