SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2528

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Rammurti Kushawaha, Member (Judicial), Yogendra Kumar Singh, Member (Technical)
Sandeep Khaitan – Appellant
Versus
Sandeep Bhagat – Respondent
CP (IB)/24/GB/2019|IA (IBC)/45/GB/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. A. Prasad
For the Respondents: Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Adv. R-5, Mr. Nishant Das (Adv.) (R-1, 2 & 4), Mr. M Sharma (Adv.) (R. 5)

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) - Sections 68, 60(5), 235A, 236 - NCLT Rules, 2016 - Rule 11 - Jurisdiction of NCLT to adjudicate and punish for offences of fraudulent removal of property - The NCLT, in its summary jurisdiction, cannot conduct a trial for offences under Section 68 or impose penal consequences.

(B) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 68 is a penal provision dealing with punishment for concealment of property. Section 235A provides for punishment where no specific penalty is provided. Both are punitive in nature.

(C) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 236 mandates that offences under the Code shall be tried by a Special Court established under the Companies Act, 2013, on a complaint by the Board or Central Government. The NCLT cannot usurp this jurisdiction. (Paras 10-14, 17-23)

Facts of the case:
An application was filed by the Liquidator of a corporate debtor under Section 68 read with Section 60(5) of the IBC and Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules. The Liquidator alleged that before the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), various officers/respondents had fraudulently removed substantial assets (machinery, vehicles, etc.) of the corporate debtor. The respondents, including the suspended directors and others, filed replies denying the allegations and shifting blame. The matter came before the NCLT Guwahati Bench.

Findings of Court:
The NCLT held that the principal question was whether it had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the allegations and grant relief under Section 68. The court found that Section 68 is a penal provision requiring determination of foundational facts like wilfulness and fraudulent intent, which necessitates a full trial. Citing precedents from the NCLAT, the court held that an act termed an offence under Chapter VII of Part II of the IBC cannot be dealt with by the Adjudicating Authority by imposing a fine. The trial of such offences must occur before a Special Court under Section 236 of the IBC upon a complaint by the Board or Central Government. Consequently, the application was dismissed as not maintainable.

Issues: The main issue was whether the NCLT, while exercising jurisdiction under the Code, is empowered to adjudicate allegations of fraudulent removal of property and grant relief under Section 68 of the IBC.

Ratio Decidendi: The NCLT does not have the jurisdiction to try offences under Section 68 or Section 235A of the IBC. Such offences are to be prosecuted before the competent Special Court in the manner prescribed under Section 236 of the Code. The NCLT's summary jurisdiction under Section 60(5) cannot be used to conduct a criminal trial or impose penal consequences.

Result: IA (IBC)/45/GB/2023 is dismissed as not maintainable. Parties: The applicant was the Resolution Professional, later substituted by the Liquidator, of the corporate debtor. The respondents were the suspended directors, employees, and others alleged to have involved in the removal of assets. Dissenting opinions: None. The order was unanimous by the bench composed of a Member (Judicial) and a Member (Technical).

Table of Content
1. application filed under section 68 and section 60(5) ibc for directions against respondents. (Para 1 , 1)
2. parties' submissions regarding removal of assets and alleged involvement of respondents. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. tribunal lacks jurisdiction to try offences under section 68 and 235a ibc; only special court can try such offences. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
4. application dismissed as not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)

1. The present Interlocutory Application is filed before this Tribunal under the provisions of Section 68 read with section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“the Code”) and under Rule 11 of NCLT Rules 2016 (“NCLT Rules”). The present application has been filed by the Resolution Professional of Shree Sai Prakash Alloys Private Limited which was later substituted by Liquidator/Applicant, seeking for the following reliefs:-

a) allow the present Application;

b) Pass necessary order(s) / direction(s) under section 68 of the Code against Respondents for removal of the part property of CD;

c) Pass any further order(s) / direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. Submissions by the Applicant:

2.1. The Applicant submitted that the application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 7 of the code was filed by Punjab National Bank, was reinstated by the Hon’ble NCLT, Guwahati Bench vide order dated 30.09.2022 which was originally admitted on 23.08.2019 and the period from 23.08.2019 to 29.09.2022 was excluded.

2.2. It was further submitted that the erstwhile Interim Resolution Professional, Mr.

Anil Agarwal, was relieved from his duties and Mr. Amit Pareek, bearing IBBI Registration No. IBBI/IPA-002/IP-N00413/2017-2018/11205, was appointed as Interim Resolution Professional and subsequently confirmed as Resolution Professional by the Committee of Creditors in its 2nd meeting held on 07.11.2022 with 100% voting share. Copy of NCLT order dated 30.09.2022 & CoC Minutes dated 07.11.2022 is annexed as ‘Annexure-1’.

2.3. The Applicant further submitted that upon receipt of the NCLT order dated

30.09.2022, the Resolution Professional undertook multiple visits to the registered office and plant of the Corporate Debtor situated at Rongsokona Village, Meghalaya, on 05.10.2022, 07.10.2022, 17.10.2022, 07.11.2022 and many times for the purposes of physical verification, custody and security of assets and inspection of plant and machinery. During such visits, it was observed that Respondent No. 1 had removed substantial assets of the Corporate Debtor, including machinery, electric motors, vehicles, and investments in shares, having a consolidated value of more than Crores of rupees, details are as under:

Machineries & Electric motors:

Complete work shop of Plant, 2 Nos. of Lathe Machines, 2 Nos. Siring Machines, Electric Panel Board, 3 Nos. Continuance Motor, 3 Nos. Inter Motors, 3 Nos. Inter Stand, 3 Nos Gear Box set, Main Motor, Blower Motor, 2 Nos. D.C.

Motors, Pinch Roll Motor, Flying Siring Motor.

Vehicle a. 4 Nos. of Vehicles

2.4. Furthermore, the Applicant submitted that the CD was functioning and running its business till 13.08.2022, as evidenced from its provisional financial statements reflecting revenue from operations amounting to Rs. 5,42,99,287/- for the period April 2022 to September 2022. However, the operations ceased on account of disconnection of electricity supply by the Meghalaya Electricity Power Distribution Ltd. on 13.08.2022. It was contended that the removal of the aforesaid assets by Respondent No. 1 fraudulently, making CD incapable of continuing its operations. Copy of the provisional financial statements is annexed as ‘Annexure 2’.

2.5. Furthermore, the Applicant submitted that during site inspection, it was also discovered that at the factory site few machinery, electric mot

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top