Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.77 seconds)
Mmtc Limited vs National Spot Exchange Limited on 30 March, 2026 cites

Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 24 September, 2012

44. It is noted that, the competent authority under MPID Act and EOW supported the scheme, though they had reservations on compliance with Order dated 13th October 2022 of MPID Court has upheld vide Order dated 15th March 2023 by Hon'ble Bombay High Court 5 and Order dated 10th April 2023 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as discharge of specified persons from criminal action. As regards discharge of specified persons from criminal action, we have already noted in the preceding para that the approval of proposed scheme does not result into automatic discharge or release of specified persons from the criminal actions, which may lie against them, and such discharge or release is dependent on the Order(s), the courts or authorities may pass on an application to be filed in accordance with the Scheme. Accordingly, it is for the courts or relevant authorities, where such criminal proceedings against specified persons are pending, to examine whether the specified persons, including the petitioner and 63 moons can be relieved of criminal consequences arising from the events that led to payment default. It is relevant to note the decisions in case of K. Bharthi Devi & Anr. v. State of Telangana & Anr., SLP (Criminal) No. 4353 of 2018; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the High Courts in exercise of their power under Section 482 of Cr.PC can compound or quash the non-compoundable offences to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Accordingly, such stipulation in the scheme cannot said to be against public policy or illegal.
Supreme Court of India Cites 81 - Cited by 53834 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1