{"id":273998,"date":"2022-09-19T16:00:08","date_gmt":"2022-09-19T10:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=273998"},"modified":"2022-09-19T16:00:08","modified_gmt":"2022-09-19T10:30:08","slug":"section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Dishonour of Cheque &#8211; S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: In yet another issue involving the true import of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the bench of Surya Kant and <strong>JB Pardiwala*<\/strong>, JJ has laid down the guiding principles for dealing with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and had held that for fastening the criminal liability, there is no legal requirement for the complainant to show that the accused partner of the firm was aware about each and every transaction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court held that,<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cif any Director or Partner wants the process to be quashed by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, on the ground that only a bald averment is made in the complaint and that he is really not concerned with the issuance of the cheque, he must in order to persuade the High Court to quash the process either furnish some sterling incontrovertible material or acceptable circumstances to substantiate his contention. He must make out a case that making him stand the trial would be an abuse of process of court.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Background<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the case at hand, a Partnership Firm named Sira Marketing Services used to purchase milk and milk products from the appellant\/complainant on credit basis. A cheque for Rs. 10,00,000, issued by the Partnership firm to clear its dues, came to be dishonoured, leading to a complaint being filed under Section 138 of the NI Act. \u00a0The respondent, one of the partners of the Partnership Firm, preferred an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in the High Court and prayed that the criminal proceedings instituted against her may be quashed, on the ground that much before the cheque came to be issued, the firm had been dissolved. The accounts of the firm were also settled on 13-02-2017 following the dissolution.<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>High Court\u2019s Ruling <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Madras High Court quashed the proceedings against the respondent herein mainly on the ground that there was nothing to indicate as to how and in what manner the respondent at the relevant point of time was in-charge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the firm. The High Court took the view that the complaint can be prosecuted as against the respondent herein only if the allegations made in the complaint fulfils the requirements of Section 141 of the NI Act. The High Court took the view that merely by reciting the words used under Section 141 of the NI Act in the complaint no vicarious liability can be fastened on the partner of the firm.<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Supreme Court\u2019s Ruling<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Contrary to Madras High Court\u2019s ruling, the Supreme Court found clear and specific averments not only in the complaint but also in the statutory notice issued to the respondent that the cheque was issued with the consent of the respondent and within her knowledge. Hence, this was sufficient to put the respondent to trial for the alleged offence. It was held that 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.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court stressed that the respondent cannot get away by merely making a bald assertion 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 in-charge or responsible for day-to-day affairs of the firm. <em>To make good her case, the respondent herein is expected to lead unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court observed that a Director or Partner cannot get the complaint quashed merely on the ground that apart from the basic averment no particulars are given in the complaint about his\/her role, because ordinarily the basic averment would be sufficient to send him\/her to trial and it could be argued that his\/her further role could be brought out in the trial.<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Principles laid down by the Supreme Court <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 40px;\">a.) The primary responsibility of the complainant is to make specific averments in the complaint so as to make the accused vicariously liable. For fastening the criminal liability, there is no legal requirement for the complainant to show that the accused partner of the firm was aware about each and every transaction. On the other hand, the first proviso to Section 141(1) of the NI Act clearly lays down that if the accused is able to prove to the satisfaction of the Court that the offence was committed without his\/her knowledge or he\/she had exercised due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence, he\/she will not be liable of punishment.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 40px;\">b.)\u00a0\u00a0 The complainant is supposed to know only generally as to who were in charge of the affairs of the company or firm, as the case may be. The other administrative matters would be within the special knowledge of the company or the firm and those who are in charge of it. In such circumstances, the complainant is expected to allege that the persons named in the complaint are in charge of the affairs of the company\/firm. It is only the Directors of the company or the partners of the firm, as the case may be, who have the special knowledge about the role they had played in the company or the partners in a firm to show before the court that at the relevant point of time they were not in charge of the affairs of the company. Advertence to Sections 138 and Section 141 respectively of the NI Act shows that on the other elements of an offence under Section 138 being satisfied, the burden is on the Board of Directors or the officers in charge of the affairs of the company\/partners of a firm to show that they were not liable to be convicted. The existence of any special circumstance that makes them not liable is something that is peculiarly within their knowledge and it is for them to establish at the trial to show that at the relevant time they were not in charge of the affairs of the company or the firm.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 40px;\">c.) The final judgement and order would depend on the evidence adduced. Criminal liability is attracted only on those, who at the time of commission of the offence, were in charge of and were responsible for the conduct of the business of the firm. But 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 \u2018qua\u2019 the firm. This would make them liable to face the prosecution but it does not lead to automatic conviction. Hence, they are not adversely prejudiced if they are eventually found to be not guilty, as a necessary consequence thereof would be acquittal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 40px;\">d.) If any Director wants the process to be quashed by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Code on the ground that only a bald averment is made in the complaint and that he\/she is really not concerned with\u00a0 the\u00a0 issuance\u00a0 of\u00a0 the\u00a0 cheque, he\/she must in order to persuade the High Court to quash the process either furnish some sterling incontrovertible material or acceptable circumstances to substantiate his\/her contention. He\/she must make out a case that making him\/her stand the trial would be an abuse of process of Court.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[S.P. Mani and Mohan Dairy v. Snehalatha Elangovan, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/QIT1yOjX\">2022 SCC OnLine SC 1238<\/a>, decided on 16.09.2022]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\">*Judgment by: Justice JB Pardiwala<\/h4>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Appellant: Advocate E.R. Kumar<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Respondent: Advocate Hari Priya Padmanabhan<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\u201cQuashing of a complaint is a serious matter. Complaint cannot be quashed for the asking. For quashing of a complaint, it must be shown that no offence is made out at all against the Director or Partner.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":274008,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[23574,50074,30606,51801,37265,51802,51803],"class_list":["post-273998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-dishonour-of-cheques","tag-negotiable-instruments-act-1881","tag-ni-act","tag-quashing-of-ni-act-proceeding","tag-section-138-of-ni-act","tag-section-141-of-negotiable-instruments-act","tag-vicarious-liability-of-director-partner"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"\u201cQuashing of a complaint is a serious matter. Complaint cannot be quashed for the asking. For quashing of a complaint, it must be shown that no offence is made out at all against the Director or Partner.\u201d\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-09-19T10:30:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"name\":\"Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-09-19T10:30:08+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dishonour of Cheque &#8211; S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0","og_description":"\u201cQuashing of a complaint is a serious matter. Complaint cannot be quashed for the asking. For quashing of a complaint, it must be shown that no offence is made out at all against the Director or Partner.\u201d","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-09-19T10:30:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","name":"Dishonour of Cheque - S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg","datePublished":"2022-09-19T10:30:08+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/19\/section-141-ni-act-dishonour-cheque-burden-proof-vicarious-liability-quashment-director-partner-complainant-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dishonour of Cheque &#8211; S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company\/firm; Burden on Director\/Partner to prove their innocence: SC\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-75-1-1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":268324,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/13\/dishonour-of-cheque-partner-partnership-vicarious-liability-negotiable-instruments-act-section-141-section-138-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":0},"title":"Dishonour of cheque| Partner cannot be held to be vicariously liable when partnership firm is not tried as primary offender: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"June 13, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Explaining the law on vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the bench of Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna*, JJ has held that while Section 141 of the NI Act extends vicarious criminal liability to officers associated with the company or firm when one of the twin\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-200.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-200.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-200.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-200.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-200.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":251535,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/20\/section-141-ni-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":1},"title":"Is it mandatory to arraign firm as accused to make partner liable for dishonor of cheque under Ss. 138\/141 of NI Act? HC explains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 20, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Alok Kumar Verma, J., addressed a matter revolving around dishonour of cheque. Appellant-Complainant preferred an appeal against the decision of the trial court wherein the respondent accused was acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Facts Accused had requested money\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":261806,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/16\/dishonour-of-cheque-8\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":2},"title":"Can only a sole proprietor be held liable under S. 138 NI Act for dishonour of cheque drawn on account of sole proprietorship concern? Tis Hazari Court decodes","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 16, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi: While deciding a matter under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Devanshu Sajlan, MM-05 (NI Act) reiterated the settled position of law that there is no concept of vicarious liability in case of a sole proprietorship concern since a sole proprietorship concern does\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tis-hazari","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":261058,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/03\/whether-proceedings-under-ss-138-and-141-of-ni-act-can-be-initiated-against-corporate-debtor-during-moratorium-period\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":3},"title":"Whether proceedings under Ss. 138 and 141 of NI Act can be initiated against corporate debtor during moratorium period? Madras HC answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: N. Sathish Kumar, J., while addressing a matter with regard to the dishonour of cheques under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, held that the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, would apply only to corporate debtor, but the natural\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Madras_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Madras_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Madras_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Madras_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Madras_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":274559,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/27\/supreme-court-calcutta-high-court-section-141negotiable-instruments-act-1881-dishonour-of-cheque-interest-of-justice-managing-director-criminal-liability-vicarious-liability-independent-non-executive\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":4},"title":"Explained| Dishonour of Cheques: Can non-executive Directors of the accused company be held vicariously liable under Section 141 NI Act?","author":"Editor","date":"September 27, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Supreme Court: In an appeal against a judgment passed by the Calcutta High Court dismissing the Criminal Revision Application filed by the appellants for quashing the proceedings under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act,1881, the division bench of Indira Banerjee* and J.K. Maheshwari has\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255760,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/18\/explained-section-138-read-with-section-141-of-the-ni-act-vicarious-liability-of-directors-of-a-company-for-dishonour-of-cheques\/","url_meta":{"origin":273998,"position":5},"title":"Explained| Sections 138 and 141 of NI Act: Vicarious liability of directors of a company for dishonour of cheques","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 18, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Explaining the law relating to vicarious liability of the Directors of a company under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the bench of Ajay Rastogi* and Abhay S. Oka, JJ has held that if, at the time the offence was committed, the person accused\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/273998","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=273998"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/273998\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/274008"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=273998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=273998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=273998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}