Cheque Case Against Director/Partner Of Firm Can Be Quashed Only If There Is Unimpeachable & Incontrovertible Evidence That They Were Not Concerned With Issuance Of Cheque
Case: S P Mani and Mohan Dairy vs Dr. Snehalatha Elangovan
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala
Case No.: CrA 1586 OF 2022
Court Observation: “Vicarious criminal liability can be inferred against the partners of a firm when it is specifically averred in the complaint about the status of the partners ‘qua’ the firm.”
“In our view, this was sufficient to put the respondent herein to trial for the alleged offence. We are saying so because the case of the respondent that at the time of issuance of the cheque or at the time of the commission of the offence, she was in no manner concerned with the firm or she was not incharge or responsible for daytoday affairs of the firm cannot be on the basis of mere bald assertion in this regard. The same is not sufficient. To make good her case, the respondent herein is expected to lead unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence. Nothing of the sort was adduced by the respondent before the High Court to get the proceedings quashed. The High Court had practically no legal basis to say that the averments made in the complaint are not sufficient to fasten the vicarious liability upon the respondent by virtue of Section 141 of the NI Act.”
Previous Posts
