SC Dismisses Petitioner’s SLP Against Respondent’s Bail Extension Citing Lack of Locus in the Matter

Case Details: Gluckrich Capital (P.) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal - [2023] 150 taxmann.com 540 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Krishna Murari & Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.
  • Ms Vanshaja Shukla, Adv. & Ms Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR for the Appellant.
  • Karan Bharioke, Adv. & Ashish Batra, AOR for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the corporate debtor. During pendency of insolvency proceedings before NCLT, an order was passed directing Resolution Professional (RP) not to proceed with approval of resolution plan.

Meanwhile, the financial creditor lodged FIR against respondent no 3 to 5, who were suspended directors of corporate debtor. Thereafter, respondent no. 3 to 5 filed a writ before the High Court challenging FIR lodged against them.

The High court by order extended transit anticipatory bail granted to respondents. Consequently, the Petitioner (unsecured financial creditor) of the corporate debtor filed an instant petition before Supreme Court challenging interim order of High Court.

The Petitioner alleged that he was an interested party to challenge extension of anticipatory transit bail granted to respondents against which insolvency proceedings were pending under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC, 2016).

Supreme Court Held

The Apex Court was of view that the petitioner was neither informant nor a party to proceedings pending before High Court and was totally unconnected with FIR lodged by financial creditors.

The Apex Court held that the petitioner had no locus in matter and thus, special leave petition filed by petitioner was to be dismissed.