At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

Gujarat High Court Clarifies Roles of Additional Directors in Cheque Dishonor Cases: No Automatic Vicarious Liability Without Specific Averments

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Gujarat High Court has set a significant precedent regarding the liability of additional directors in cases of cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Honourable Mr. Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt, while delivering the verdict, stated, “No automatic vicarious liability for additional directors without specific averments,” emphasizing the need for clear and specific allegations to establish the responsibility of directors in corporate offences.

The case, involving the quashing of FIR and court proceedings against additional directors of a company, was closely watched by legal experts and corporate entities. The High Court’s decision came as a relief to the applicants, who were the additional directors of the company accused of cheque dishonor.

Justice Bhatt’s observations provided clarity on the interpretation of Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and their applicability to different types of directors. The judgment distinguished the roles and responsibilities of Managing Directors, Non-Executive Directors, Executive Directors, and Additional Directors, noting that the latter cannot be automatically held liable in cheque dishonor cases.

The Court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings, citing a lack of specific averments against the applicants and the non-satisfaction of legal provisions as required under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Date of Decision: 08 November 2023

SANGEETHA GOPALKRISHNAN NAIR Versus  STATE OF GUJARAT

Latest Legal News