https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791450 Communications from a Bankruptcy Trustee to the passport authority, advising restraint on a bankrupt petitioner's overseas travel during subsisting insolvency proceedings, were treated as consequential notices within the insolvency framework and not as an independent exercise of power under the Passports Act. Section 141(1)(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was applied as creating a statutory bar on foreign travel without permission of the Adjudicating Authority, and the trustee's role was recognised as administering the estate and ensuring compliance with that mandate. The Article 21 challenge failed because the restriction was not arbitrary and permission could still be sought from the National Company Law Tribunal. en-us Tue, 21 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2026 09:49:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791450 Communications from a Bankruptcy Trustee to the passport authority, advising restraint on a bankrupt petitioner's overseas travel during subsisting insolvency proceedings, were treated as consequential notices within the insolvency framework and not as an independent exercise of power under the Passports Act. Section 141(1)(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was applied as creating a statutory bar on foreign travel without permission of the Adjudicating Authority, and the trustee's role was recognised as administering the estate and ensuring compliance with that mandate. The Article 21 challenge failed because the restriction was not arbitrary and permission could still be sought from the National Company Law Tribunal. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 21 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791450