Insolvency framework governs document disputes; Section 340 CrPC complaint refused where claims were to be examined under the IBC.

An admitted Section 7 insolvency proceeding had already triggered the corporate insolvency resolution process and moratorium, so the Tribunal held that claims and supporting documents were to be examined within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework by the resolution professional and, where relevant, the committee of creditors. A suspended director's allegations of fabricated documents and related disputes over the term loan were matters that could be raised before those insolvency forums. In that setting, the Tribunal declined to entertain a request for a preliminary inquiry, criminal complaint, or forensic directions under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and rejected the application.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should be entertained for alleged fabrication of documents used in an admitted insolvency proceeding, and whether the suspended director was entitled to the requested criminal complaint and forensic directions.

Analysis: The admitted Section 7 insolvency application had already led to commencement of the corporate insolvency resolution process and the company was under moratorium. The order records that the resolution professional is required to examine claims and supporting documents in accordance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It also notes that the suspended director could raise disputes relating to the term loan before the resolution professional or the committee of creditors under the insolvency framework. In that setting, the Tribunal found no to entertain the prayer for a preliminary enquiry or criminal complaint under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Conclusion: The application for action under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was rejected.

---