How to reply tocriminal petition filed in high court in 138 ni case

The petitioner has a valid point as he is (as stated by you) not involved in the transaction(s) concerning subject cheque.

The Magistrate (Trial Court) should not have issued summons to such director.

Contest through your lawyer if you have some clinching evidence qua involvment of the petitioner (accused in original cheque dishonour case).

If the cheque was issued by any person in his personal capacity then only that person is to be prosecuted, but if the cheque is issued by company under company name and title with signatures of signatory then you can file for al of the related persons . However it is advised to get the reply drafted by a lawyer and make him to appear for arguments.

the directors of the company may be held vicariously liable for the bouncing of checks issued by the company. But if a person is to be held liable under Section 141 of the NI Act, it is pertinent to mention that the liability of that person should exists under Section 138 of the NI Act.

Thank you.While the proceedings were running in lower court the managing director who signed the cheque passed away.Other two directors not signed the cheque.One director who was a director during the business time and also when the cheque bounced and also when the case was filed but later resigned.Now got stay saying that he was not involved in the day today affairs of the company then...how to vacate the stay and make him liable.