The Honourable High Court of Delhi has held that it is clear from the express language of the provision of Section 32A of the IBC, 2016 that a Corporate Debtor would not be liable for any offence which was committed prior to the commencement of CIRP and the corporate debtor would not be prosecuted if a resolution plan has been approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) or the Adjudicating Authority. In this case, no dispute exists that a resolution plan has been approved by the Adjudicating Authority. i.e., NCLT and in the circumstances, there is much merit in the contention that the petitioner, i.e., Tata Steel BSL Ltd. & Anr. cannot be prosecuted and is liable to be discharged.
The petition is, accordingly, allowed and the impugned order dated 16.08.2019 and the impugned summons dated 21.08.2019, are set-aside. The impugned compliant (CC No. 770/2019) against the petitioner, is also set-aside. Further, the Delhi High Court has clarified that this order will not affect the prosecution of the erstwhile promoters or any of the officers who may be directly responsible for committing the offences in relation to the affairs of the petitioner company.
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *