9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Amrit Sarkar, Advs. For the Respondent : V.N. Raghupathy, Adv. ORDER 1. Leave granted. We have heard learned Counsels for the parties. 2. The challenge in this appeal is against the order of the High Court of Karnataka dated 11.06.2012 by which the petition filed Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure by the Appellant for quashing of the criminal proceedings instituted against him h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etrology it has been mentioned that the allegedly offending goods (Castrol Plus) were manufactured plus packed by M/s. Castrol India Limited. The offence, therefore, has been committed by the Company and the Appellant has been sought to be made vicariously liable merely because at the relevant point of time he was holding the office of Managing Director of Castrol India Limited. 6. Section 74 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s knowledge or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. 7. In the present complaint petition, there is no averment or statement whatsoever that the Appellant as the Managing Director of the Company was responsible or incharge of the conduct of the business of the Company in respect of which the offence in question has been alleged to have been committed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
