Delhi Development Act, 1957
Section 14 & 29(2)—Prosecution for non-confirming use of residential building—High Court declined to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court—Appeal—Finding of fact recorded by the trial court with regard to the two directors who came to be acquitted is that there was nothing on record to indicate that they were in charge of the day-to-day affairs/management of the company—It is the company as a legal entity which was sought to be prosecuted, and directors were prosecuted by virtue of their vicarious liability under Section 32 of the 1957 Act—Two directors/respondents, who came to be acquitted were in a position to lead evidence to establish that they were not in day to day affairs/management of the company—No error found in impugned order passed by the High Court declining to grant leave to appeal—Appeal dismissed.
[Para 6]