Prudeta
Prudeta
2026 INSC 324
📌 Paras 2-3
The appellant, a Director of an accused company, challenged the High Court's refusal to quash a summoning order under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The company had issued cheques that were returned unpaid due to "DRAWERS SIGNATURES DIFFERS AND ALTERATIONS/CORRECTIONS ON INSTRUMENTS OTHER THAN DATE". Proceedings were initiated after a legal notice was sent.
📌 Para 6
Whether the appellant, merely by being a Director and signing Board Resolutions, was sufficiently involved in the day-to-day management of the company to justify the issuance of summons against her under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
📌 Paras 7-8, 10
The Court referred to establi
The bench further analyzed the constitutional validity of the impugned provisions and discussed the interpretation of Articles 14 and 21 in light of recent precedents...
Citing the ratio in prior decisions, the court held that the legislative intent was to ensure...
No credit card required · 14-day free trial