LANDMARK CASE
Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels and Tours
(2012) 5 SCC 661 · Supreme Court of India · Commercial and criminal law
At a glance
- Citation: (2012) 5 SCC 661
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Commercial and criminal law
- In one line: No. The company must be made an accused.
1 Facts
Cheque bounce complaints were filed against directors but not the company.
2 Issue
Can directors be prosecuted without the company?
3 What the court decided
No. The company must be made an accused.
4 Why it matters
Key for corporate criminal liability.
5 Think about it
Why is the company essential?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Commercial and criminal law
- Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra (2014) 9 SCC 129
- Rangappa v. Sri Mohan (2010) 11 SCC 441
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Amish Devgan v. Union of IndiaAnimal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.