Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels and Tours Private Limited
(2012) 5 SCC 661
In the Supreme Court of India
Criminal Appeal 838/2008
Before Justice Dalveer Bhandari, Justice S J Mukhopadhaya and Justice Dipak Misra
Decided on April 27, 2012
Relevancy of the case: Interpretation of Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 in the context of liability of a company and its directors
Statutes and Provisions Involved
- The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 85, 67)
- The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Section 7, 118, 138, 139,140, 141)
- The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Section 482)
- The Companies Act, 2013 (Section 34)
Relevant Facts of the Case
- The petitioner is the authorised signatory of International Travels Ltd. She issued a cheque in favour of the respondent and it got dishonoured.
- The respondent initiated criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioner without making the company an accused.
- The present case deals with the liability of the authorised signatory without making the company an accused.
Opinion of the Bench
- The court interpreted the legal fiction of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner will be liable only when the company is made an accused.
- The same interpretation applies to Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- The court quashed the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
- Appeal allowed.