10/02/2025
Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque by a Company
HITESH VERMA VS. M/S HEALTH CARE AT HOME INDIA PVT. LTD. , SLP(Crl) No. 008368 / 2019
FACTS: A complaint for dishonour of cheque was filed against a company and its directors and the Appellant. The Appellant approached the High Court seeking quashing of the complaint.
Inter-alia it was argued that he/she was not responsible for the day to day affairs of the company. Further, he/she was not the signatory to the cheques. However, High Court refused to interfere in the proceedings and dismissed the appeal.
At the onset it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it is only the signatory of a cheque that could be made liable for the alleged offence. However, nowhere in the complaint it is asserted that the Appellant was in charge of the business of the company.
HELD: "There are twin requirements under sub-section (1) of S.141 NI Act, 1881. In the complaint it must be alleged that the person sought to be held liable by virtue of vicarious liability, at the time when the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to the company. A Director who in charge of the company and a Director who was responsible to the company for the conduct of business, are two different aspects. The requirement of law is that both the ingredients of sub-section (1) of s.141 NI Act must be incorporated in the complaint.
Admittedly there is no assertion in the complaint that the Appellant, at the time of commission of the offence was in charge of the business of the company. Therefore, on a plain reading, the Appellant cannot be prosecuted with the aid of sub-section (1) of S.141 NI Act."
In view of this, the Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the impugned orders and allowed the present appeal. While doing so the Hon'ble Court made it clear that it has not touched upon the merits of the complaint with respect to other Accused persons.
Send a message to learn more