9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Petition to quash criminal proceedings under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 based on allegations under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Analysis: 1. The respondent filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the accused availed a bill discounting facility but failed to honor the cheque issued for repayment. 2. The petitioner, as the 4th accused, contended that he ceased to be a director of the company and provided evidence to support his claim. 3. The petitioner argued that he was not in charge of the company at the time of the offense, citing relevant legal provisions and court precedents. 4. The court referred to previous judgments emphasizing the need for specific allegations to implicate directors under section 141(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 5. The court highlighted the importance of proving that the accused was in charge of and responsible for the company's conduct to establish liability. 6. The court differentiated the present case from previous decisions where allegations against directors were substantiated, emphasizing the lack of evidence connecting the accused to the offense. 7. Relying on Supreme Court decisions, the court emphasized the necessity of specific allegations to establish a prima facie case against the accused. 8. Considering the lack of evidence connecting the petitioner to the offense, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. 9. The court allowed the petition, quashing the case against the petitioner while permitting proceedings against other accused individuals in accordance with the law. This detailed analysis of the judgment outlines the legal arguments, evidentiary considerations, and precedents relied upon by the court to reach the decision to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
|
