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.

Final Decision

• Appeal allowed.