The Court held that intercepted calls and investigation records did not establish demand or acceptance of illegal gratification. It affirmed that no material linked the accused to the alleged conspiracy, upholding the quashing of charges.
The Court ruled that the High Court erred in terminating the case at the pre-trial stage. It held that allegations of disproportionate assets require examination at trial and restored the prosecution.
The Court upheld the refusal to discharge the accused, citing material suggesting grave suspicion of involvement in a conspiracy. It held that the allegations warranted full trial scrutiny.
The Court held that prosecution cannot continue when no recovery is made and the only material is statements of co-accused. It ruled that such statements alone cannot justify a trial under Sections 489B and 489C.
The Supreme Court canceled anticipatory bail granted to accused who concealed the setting aside of an ex parte injunction while attempting to dispossess lawful property. The ruling emphasizes careful judicial scrutiny in serious offences.
Supreme Court held that development right of a defaulting developer do not constitute ‘asset’ or ‘property’ of corporate debtor. Further, since the said development agreement stood terminated prior to initiation of CIRP no subsisting or enforceable right survived in favour of corporate debtor.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court improperly quashed the FIR by evaluating defence evidence and deciding intention prematurely. It ruled that the complaint disclosed a prima facie offence, requiring trial.
The court ruled that requiring an Assistant Registrar’s recommendation for stamp duty exemption under Section 9A is unnecessary. The statutory registration certificate itself suffices, making the Memo issued by the Principal Secretary illegal.
The Court ruled that failing to repay a loan does not amount to cheating without proof of fraudulent intent at inception, quashing the FIR and reaffirming that civil disputes cannot be criminalized.
The Court held that loan transactions create only a debtor–creditor relationship, not entrustment, and thus no offence under Section 406 IPC was made out, quashing the criminal proceedings.