IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.82 OF 2025
AND
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.83 OF 2025
AND
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.84 OF 2025
AND
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.85 OF 2025
KIRAN KOPPULA … PETITIONER
VERSUS
M/S PIGGY VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED
AND ORS. … RESPONDENTS
(CORAM: S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
(Decided on: 28.08.2026)
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 – Section 138 – Director in Company cannot be deemed to be in-charge and responsible for Company for conduct of its business, unless requirement of Section 141 of NI Act is complied with and factual backdrop to make such requirement is specifically averred in complaint.
Held
In present case, averments in complaint are absolutely silent so far as role of petitioner to make out requirement under Section 141 of NI Act. In wake of fact that petitioner was neither party to agreement nor he is signatory to cheque, merely because he was appointed as additional Director at the time of presentation / dishonored of cheque, in absence of specification as to his role in Company, he cannot be prosecuted for offence under Section 138 of NI Act. Pertinently, complaint is absolutely silent as to when petitioner become Director of Company or as to what role he had in day to day business of Company. (Para 13)
For Judgment Click 👇