2020 (2) TMI 232 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

NCLT upholds jurisdiction for SFIO investigation amid objections, emphasizes public interest and fund accountability.

The NCLT affirmed its jurisdiction to direct the SFIO to investigate financial discrepancies despite objections, emphasizing the importance of upholding ... Recall of order - Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority-NCLT to issue directions directly to the SFIO under Section 210 read with Section 213 (b) (in) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- When neither of the Ex.-directors or the company secretary or any other person not prepared to divulge the information as to where such an amount has disappeared, directions were issued to the SFIO to investigate and it should have been followed rather than filing of application for recalling the order on account of a technical issue of obtaining permission from the Central Government. The same could be done by the SFIO itself as the siphoning of funds is in respect of public money which is noticed in the order dated 16.11.2018. Application dismissed. Issues: Jurisdiction of NCLT to issue directions to SFIO under Companies Act, 2013Analysis:The judgment revolves around the issue of the jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to issue directions directly to the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) under Section 210 read with Section 213 (b) (in) of the Companies Act, 2013. The application sought modification of an earlier order dated 16.11.2018 on the grounds that NCLT lacked the authority to issue such directions. The order in question extensively detailed the financial discrepancies in the balance sheet provided by the Resolution Professional (RP), highlighting a significant amount under 'closing stock' and total current assets. Despite the lack of cooperation in disclosing the whereabouts of the missing amount, the NCLT had directed the SFIO to investigate the matter. The judgment emphasized that procedural or technical objections should not impede the pursuit of substantial justice, especially when public money and interest are at stake.The tribunal underscored the importance of upholding public interest and ensuring the proper utilization of public funds. It noted that in cases involving significant public money, the tribunal must prioritize substantial justice over technicalities. The judgment dismissed the application seeking to recall the earlier order, emphasizing that the SFIO, given the nature of the case involving potential siphoning of public funds, should have proceeded with the investigation as directed by the NCLT, without the need for additional permissions from the Central Government. The tribunal's decision reflects a commitment to safeguarding public interest and ensuring accountability in financial matters, even in the face of jurisdictional challenges.