K.K. AHUJA Vs. V.K. VORA & ANR.
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: ss.141(1) and (2), 138 - Vicarious liability - Liability of Deputy General Manager of the Company which issued the dishonoured cheque - Held: A person is vicariously liable under sub- section (1) of s.141, if he is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company and was also incharge of business of the company - Sub-section (2) of s.141 provides that Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer though not in charge of conduct of the company would be liable if offence was committed in connivance or consent or was a result of negligence on his part - Deputy General Manager is not a person responsible to the company for conduct of business of company - Question whether he was incharge of the business of the company or not becomes irrelevant Thus, he cannot be made vicariously liable under s.141(1) - To make him liable under s.141(2), necessary averments relating to sent/connivance/negligence should be made - Since no such averments were made in the complaint, there was no error in the order quashing the summons against him - Companies Act, s.291 - Interpretation of statutes - Liability - Vicarious liability - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.482.Interpretation of statutes: Strict interpretation - Penal statutes - Held:" To be construed strictly - Penal statutes providing constructive vicarious liability to be construed much more strictly - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - s.138.
The appellant filed a complaint under s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against a company and eight others including the first respondent. The Magistrate directed issue of summons against all the accused persons. The first respondent filed petitions for quashing the proceedings against him on the ground that he was only a Deputy General Manager who was not in- charge of the company.
The High Court quashed the orders summoning the respondent holding that he was not a signatory to the cheques nor was a party to the decision to allow the cheques to be dishonoured. Aggrieved appellant filed these appeals.
