ruling - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court held that exoneration in departmental proceedings does not bar continuation of criminal prosecution, as the standards of proof and purpose differ. However, it remanded the case to the trial court to determine the validity of the prosecution sanction, emphasizing that sanction must be granted by the authority competent to remove the public servant from office. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, T. Manjunath, a Senior Inspector of Motor Vehicles in Bengaluru, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹15,000 through an intermediary. Following a trap by the Lokayukta, a criminal case was registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Transport Commissioner granted sanction for prosecution, and a chargesheet was filed. The appellant sought dischar...

This Supreme Court judgment affirms the paramountcy of the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It clarifies that the moratorium under Section 14(1)(d) does not bar the return of possession of a corporate debtor's leased asset when such a decision is a conscious business choice made by the CoC and the Resolution Professional to alleviate a financial burden on the estate. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a dispute over the possession of a property leased by Nandini Impex Private Limited, the corporate debtor. The appellants had provided loans to the company, secured by the title deeds of the property's front and rear portions. Following a default, the property was conveyed to the appellants through separate deeds ...

Tag: ruling

Supreme Court on Trap Cases: Criminal Trial Can Proceed Despite Departmental Exoneration

Supreme Court Rules Property Can Be Returned During Insolvency If Not Needed