The Supreme Court reiterated that officers of the company, including directors, cannot be held liable unless their personal involvement is demonstrated and supported by a specific statutory provision.
The case arose from an appeal against the Punjab & Haryana High Court's decision to deny the quashing of an FIR filed against the appellants. The FIR alleged violations under Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 (PLPA) related to the illegal uprooting of 256 trees in Gurugram by machinery, causing environmental damage. The appellants held managerial positions in Tata Realty and Infrastructure Limited and Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd.
The appellants argued that they were wrongly implicated as the complaint lacked allegations of their personal involvement in the act. They contended that vicarious liability could not be imposed without direct personal involvement supported by law.
The Supreme Court, setting aside the High Court's decision, clarified that mere association with a company does not automatically make its officials vicariously liable. The Court emphasized that for corporate liability to extend to an individual, specific allegations of personal involvement must be made, and there must be a statutory provision for vicarious liability. The Court also referred to previous precedents to underscore that directors cannot be held liable unless there is evidence of their direct involvement.
The Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellants, finding that the complaint lacked the necessary specific allegations to establish their personal liability.
๐๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ง๐ถ๐๐น๐ฒ: ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ป๐ท๐ฎ๐ ๐๐๐๐ & ๐ข๐ฟ๐. ๐๐. ๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐๐ฎ๐ป๐ฎ & ๐๐ป๐ฟ.
๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐น ๐ก๐ผ. ๐ญ๐ญ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฑ
Sign Up on mentblue here: 
And check out each of mentblue offerings here:
The Supreme Courtโs May 13, 2025 judgment has fundamentally revised the process for designating Senior Advocates, moving away from a rigid points-based system and placing greater value on holistic qualities central to the legal profession.
In a highly unusual development, the Supreme Court has ordered liquidation of Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. even after the resolution plan was approved, the amount paid, and implementation had commenced-an extraordinary outcome almost never witnessed under Indiaโs insolvency regime. The Courtโs decision to set aside JSW Steelโs resolution plan underscores that gross violations of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be cured by mere payment or partial ...
Letโs consider a startup working on prototypes that are both aesthetically crafted and functionally driven, with innovators eager to protect their creations. While copyright is often the go-to protection for creative works, a dilemma arises under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act. This provision withdraws copyright from certain works once they are commercially reproduced, unless protected under the Designs Act. In Cryogas v. Inox, the Supreme Court attem...