RAMRAJSINGH versus STATE OF M.P. & ANR.

RAMRAJSINGH versus STATE OF M.P. & ANR.

Conviction of appellant under Section 138 is not justified as there was no evidence or averment of appellant being in charge and responsible for conduct of business of the company; he was not given notice nor was any specific role attributed to him in the complaint.

Parties
Appellant: Ramrajsingh; Respondents: State of M.P. & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Revision Application Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction set aside.
Legal Topics
Negotiable Instruments, Vicarious Liability, Dishonour of Cheque
Criminal Law Banking Law Negotiable Instruments Vicarious Liability Dishonour of Cheque

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramrajsingh

Appellant

State of M.P. & Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Revision Application Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against appellant is justified when no evidence of appellant being in charge and responsible for company affairs
  2. 2 Whether specific averments attributing responsibility to the appellant are required for liability under Section 141 of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

Conviction of appellant under Section 138 is not justified as there was no evidence or averment of appellant being in charge and responsible for conduct of business of the company; he was not given notice nor was any specific role attributed to him in the complaint.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction set aside.

Orders

  • Conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against appellant not maintainable.
  • Appeal allowed.