As per the case facts, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay quashed criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act against Respondent No. 2, a director, on the ... ground of insufficient averments in the complaint to invoke vicarious liability under Section 141 of the NI Act. HDFC Bank, the appellant, challenged this decision. The question arose whether the averments in the complaint were sufficient to fulfill the requirements of Section 141(1) of the NI Act for proceeding against Respondent No. 2, a director of the company. Finally, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's judgment. The Court found that the averments in the complaint against Respondent No. 2 fulfilled the requirements of Section 141(1) of the NI Act, and thus, the High Court was unjustified in quashing the proceedings against her. The order issuing process to Respondent No. 2 was restored to be proceeded with in accordance with law.