Supreme Court Issues Directions to Speed Up MACT Claims Amid Six-Year Average Pendency  ||  Supreme Court: Sex Selection Practices Continues Due to Preference For Male Children  ||  Supreme Court: Injury From a Fallen Tree is Not a Motor Accident for MACT Claims  ||  Madras HC: Recent Tamil Nadu Elections Reflect Voting Beyond Caste and Community Considerations  ||  Supreme Court: Children Should Not Undergo Psychological Tests in Custody Cases Unless Necessary  ||  Jharkhand HC: Lokayukta Cannot Delegate Core Adjudicatory Powers Even in Case Against Brother  ||  Ker HC: Complainant Can Invoke Presumptions After Proving Transaction, Cheque Execution Convincingly  ||  Supreme Court Cancels SARFAESI Auction Sale After 16 Years Due to a 5-Day Payment Delay  ||  Jhar HC Orders 2-Month Probe Deadline, DGP Monitoring to Overhaul Sexual Violence Response in State  ||  Delhi HC: Social Media Cannot Undermine Judiciary; Intermediaries Must Act Without Court Orders    

SC: When Company Isn’t Added as Accused the Director Who Signed Cheque is Not Liable for Dishonour - (23 Dec 2024)

CRIMINAL

Supreme Court while upholding the acquittal of a man convicted for dishonoured cheque, has observed that under Section 138 of NI Act authorised signatory of a company cannot be held liable for dishonour of a cheque drawn on company's account unless the company is arraigned as the principal accused.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   DISHONOURED CHEQUE   AUTHORISED SIGNATORY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved