Criminal Petition seeking quashal of prosecution under Section 138 NI Act against partners who were not drawers or signatories of dishonoured cheques.
Criminal proceedings in C.C. No.35 of 2017 quashed against accused Nos.4 to 7; bail bonds cancelled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO
Criminal Petition No.5563 of 2017
ORDER:
The petitioners are accused Nos.4 to 7 in C.C. No.35 of 2017 pending on the file of I Special Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B Nagar, where the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the Act’), which is outcome of private complaint of 1st respondent—complainant.
2
Dr.SSRB,J Crlp_5563_2017
partnership firm in question within the meaning of Section 148 of the Act.
3
Dr.SSRB,J Crlp_5563_2017
day-to-day affairs of the Accused No.1 company and if so, how that specific acts required as held by this Court in Narendra Kurangi vs M/s.Greenmint India Agritech (P) Limited, Hyderabad1 katena of the expressions in Aparna A.Shah Vs. Sheth Developers2 .
Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________________________ JUSTICE Dr. B.SIVA SANKARA RAO Date:15.09.2017 knl
1 2016 (1) ALD (crl.) 177
2 2013 Crl.L.J. 3743
2 issues framed by the court
Whether accused Nos.4 to 7 are vicariously liable as partners under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when they are not drawers or signatories.
Whether specific averments regarding responsibility for day-to-day affairs of the partnership firm were required to establish liability.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narendra Kurangi vs M/s.Greenmint India Agritech (P) Limited, HyderabadRelied on¶14
2016 (1) ALD (crl.) 177
Aparna A.Shah Vs. Sheth DevelopersRelied on¶14
2013 Crl.L.J. 3743
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Accused Nos.4 to 7
2nd respondent—State
DR. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
DR. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO
Parties & counsel
