The Supreme Court has ruled that in a cheque bounce case, the
liability of a companyâ€™s director can be inferred only if it can be
proved that the accused was in charge for the conduct of the company at
the time of the alleged offence.
Merely because a person was involved with the negotiations to obtain a loan cannot make him or her liable for the offence relating to the bouncing of a cheque, Justices SB Sinha and HS Bedi said while setting aside an order for the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
Interpreting Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the apex court said that the liability of a person arises from being in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business of the company at the relevant time when the offence was committed and not on the basis of merely holding a designation or office. The appellant, Srikant Singh, had filed a special leave petition against the High Courtâ€™s ruling which upheld a magistrateâ€™s order holding the former liable for a cheque bounce offence.
Every time an offender stealthily leaves India to take refuge in another country, the Government of India starts all over again with its strategy of bringing him back to the nation to make him stan More
Helplinelaw can set up your session with quality and experienced lawyers to discuss and resolve your legal matters. You can avail consultation in form of sending questions, phone call or webchat discussion More