Criminal prosecution cannot continue after a final tribunal finding negates involvement in day-to-day affairs of the firm.

Criminal prosecution was held unsustainable where the appellate tribunal had already set aside the penalty order and that finding had attained finality. The tribunal had expressly found no material to show that the petitioner was involved in the day-to-day affairs of the firm, so the factual foundation for attributing liability in the prosecution disappeared. In those circumstances, the criminal court could not continue proceedings on a basis inconsistent with the subsisting tribunal finding, and the proceedings against the petitioner were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings could be quashed against the petitioner when the appellate tribunal had finally set aside the penalty order and found no material to show her involvement in the day-to-day affairs of the firm.

Analysis: The adjudication penalty against the petitioner had been reversed by the appellate tribunal, and that order had attained finality. The tribunal had expressly found that there was nothing on record to show that she was concerned with the day-to-day affairs of the company. In such circumstances, the foundation of the prosecution against her no longer survived, and a criminal court could not proceed on a basis contrary to the subsisting tribunal finding.

Conclusion: The proceedings against the petitioner were quashed.

---