Latest news with #SatishSharma
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
Man sentenced to 7 years in jail for abduction, rape of minor 11 years ago in Ghaziabad
Ghaziabad: A man was sentenced to seven years in jail on Saturday and fined Rs 20,000 in an 11-year-old case of abduction, inducement for marriage, and rape of a minor. The Special Pocso Court of Lal Babu Yadav mentioned that since the crime commenced before the amendment to the Pocso Act , the convict was sentenced to the maximum quantum available under penal provisions during that period. On Feb 11, 2014, a minor girl was kidnapped from near the Satmola factory in Sahibabad. Her father later registered a case of abduction and forceful marriage at the Karkar Model police station against the accused, who also worked in the same factory. Police launched a manhunt, and the girl was rescued and the accused arrested from Sahibabad railway station on Feb 22, 2014. The girl was sent for a medical test and her statement was recorded under CrPC section 164. A case was then registered under sections 363, 366, and 376 of IPC along with section 3/4 of the Pocso Act, 2012. The accused plead not guilty on all charges, claiming the girl had insisted on their marriage and that he never forced her into any sexual act. Special public prosecutor (Pocso) Satish Sharma argued that the girl was a minor and was allured for marriage. "She was taken away from the custody of her legal guardian against her will with intent of outraging her modesty," he said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Lanterna que as forças especiais usam [saiba mais] Lanterna Super Potente Saiba Mais Undo After hearing both sides, the court pronounced the accused guilty under section 363 of IPC for abduction, sentencing him to three years in jail with a fine of Rs 2000. He was also pronounced guilty under section 366 of IPC for alluring a minor for marriage and seducing her under section 366 of IPC. In addition, the court noted that while dealing with Pocso cases, the maximum quantum of sentence prescribed under IPC and the Pocso Act should be awarded. "During the time of the commission of the crime, the provision for an increased sentence of up to 20 years under the Pocso Act was not introduced, and hence the maximum quantum under section 376 of IPC and section 4 of the Pocso Act was seven years, so the convict is being sentenced to seven years along with a fine of Rs 15000," the judgment read. All sentences will run concurrently, and the amount of fine charged is to be handed over to the girl, who is now an adult, for her rehabilitation. The court also clarified that the period of time already spent in jail in connection with the ongoing case would be adjusted in the total quantum of the sentence.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Supreme Court stays liquidation of Bhushan Power & Steel
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday stayed the liquidation process for Bhushan Power & Steel (BPSL) before NCLT and ordered to maintain status quo after JSW Steel , whose resolution plan was rejected by SC, told the court that it was filing a review petition against the order. As JSW's limitation period for filing a review against the SC judgment is not yet over, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Sharma said the status quo was needed to avoid future complications as the liquidation of the company might jeopardise the review petition, which is yet to be filed by JSW. For JSW, senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul said the NCLT was rushing in the case even before the company's review plea is decided, and if liquidation is allowed, then it would be irreversible. He said JSW has time till June 2 to file the review. "If a liquidator is appointed, we will be in great difficulty. It is a profit-making company and this resolution plan was given four years ago," he said. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
India.com
09-05-2025
- Politics
- India.com
India-Pakistan tensions: Nearly 10,000 residents moved to relief camps from five border districts in Jammu, evacuation underway
Residents living along the LoC are being moved to safer areas and shelter camps after heavy cross-border shelling and attempted drone and missile attacks by Pakistan, in the Rajouri-Poonch belt on Friday. (ANI Photo) India-Pakistan tensions: Around eight to 10,000 resident from at least five border districts in Jammu region have been relocated to relief shelters in wake of the heavy cross-border shelling by Pakistan which has killed 18 civilians, and injured nearly 60 on the Indian side of the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir over the past few days. 'Eight to ten thousand border residents have been evacuated from the Rajouri-Poonch belt,' Jammu and Kashmir Minister Satish Sharma, who visited relief camps in Jammu, Rajouri, and Samba districts to take stock of arrangements and reassure displaced families, said Friday, according to news agency PTI. Sharma revealed that evacuation is still underway, while assuring the adequate food and medical facilities are being provided to displaced residents at shelter camps. Pak shells border villages after Operation Sindoor Pakistan has resorted to heavy artillery shelling across the LoC and International Border, amid heightened India-Pakistan tensions since India conducted missile strikes deep inside the enemy country and PoK under Operation Sindoor, in response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, in which terrorists killed 26 civilians in cold blood, most of them Indian Hindu tourists, in Kashmir valley. The cross-border shelling has caused extensive damage to lives and property in Poonch, Mankote, Mendhar, Nowshera, Akhnoor, R S Pura, Arnia, Samba, and Kathua, and several other areas bordering Pakistan. Officials said people living along the LoC in Poonch, Mankote, Mendhar, Nowshera, Laam, Balakote, Sunderbani, Akhnoor, and along the International Border in Garkhal-Khour, Marh, R S Pura, Arnia, Samba, Hiranagar, and Kathua, are being evacuated. Meanwhile, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, who also visited shelter camps in Mishriwala, Nagbani, Bishnah, and Thandi Khui, condemned Pakistan's unprovoked aggression, saying 'India reserves the right to defend its people and territory with full strength.' Abdullah urged officials in border district to stay alert and responsive, and ensure all needs of those relocated to relief shelters are promptly met. (With PTI inputs)
Mint
04-05-2025
- Business
- Mint
Mint Explainer: The Supreme Court's Bhushan Power ruling that has stunned India's insolvency ecosystem
On 2 May, the Supreme Court sent shockwaves through India's insolvency ecosystem with a surprise ruling that overturned a resolution plan approved five years ago for Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd (BPSL), sending the company into liquidation. On the receiving end of the ruling was JSW Steel Ltd. The company, among India's largest steelmakers, acquired BPSL through a winning ₹ 19,000 crore bid in 2021, injected capital, integrated operations, and gained control of its assets, but now finds its plans quashed. A Supreme Court bench led by Justices Bela Trivedi and Satish Sharma effectively mandated the liquidation of BPSL, marking a dramatic end to the longest-running insolvency case under India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Mint breaks down the key aspects of the judgment, the reasons behind it, its immediate fallout, and why this ruling could redefine India's insolvency resolution landscape. The Supreme Court invalidated JSW Steel's ₹ 19,350 crore resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd citing violations of key provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The ruling was passed on several pleas opposing JSW Steel's plan, including those filed by former promoter Sanjay Singal, operational creditor Kalyani Transco, and the state of Odisha. The apex court found JSW Steel had delayed implementation, failed to make mandatory payments to creditors, and attempted to bypass obligations. It also criticized the committee of creditors (CoC) for approving the plan. Using Section 142 of the IBC, the court directed the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to initiate fresh liquidation proceedings, effectively ending any chance of BPSL's revival under the existing resolution plan. 'There was a dishonest and fraudulent attempt made by JSW, misusing the process of the Court by not making the upfront payments as committed by it for about two and a half years and thereby enriching itself unjustly, and thereafter considering the rising prices of steel in the market, JSW sought to comply with the terms of Resolution Plan at a very belated stage, in collusion with the CoC and the Resolution Professional," the Supreme Court stated in its judgement. The Supreme Court cited several serious lapses to justify its decision to scrap JSW Steel's resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel and order liquidation: 'Such flagrant violation of the terms of the resolution plan, has frustrated the very object and purpose of the Code," the court said. Also read | A series of court orders changed bankruptcy rules. Now, the govt is amending the law Insolvency experts said the Supreme Court's ruling was unprecedented as it effectively sent a company—whose revival had been carried out through a court-approved plan five years ago—into liquidation. The ruling has not only disrupted the resolution process but also raises concerns about the future of insolvency proceedings in India, they said. 'Reversing a resolution plan after (five) years introduces an unprecedented element of retrospective disruption," said Ritesh Kumar Adatiya, director of NPV Insolvency Professionals. 'It not only questions the sanctity of approved plans but also puts commercial decisions at risk. Unwinding such transactions carries monetary costs, reputational damage, and systemic inefficiencies." Adatiya also stressed that the ruling could shake confidence in the insolvency process, making stakeholders more cautious. 'The ruling weakens the confidence of key stakeholders… CoC may hesitate to take decisions, and resolution applicants may become more risk-averse. The process may now become cautious and prolonged, defeating the objective of time-bound resolution." Other legal experts offered similar opinions: 'Investors who have relied on the IBC's principles of finality and the clean slate theory to avoid post-deal liabilities may now face legal risks even after successful implementation. This could chill participation in distressed asset markets, making investors more cautious when proposing resolution plans." — Yogendra Aldak, partner, Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys 'Interference after so many years makes IBC another statute filled with uncertainties… Lenders may be wary of taking decisions, and SRAs (successful resolution applicant) may hesitate to submit plans." — Sushmita Gandhi, partner, IndusLaw Shashank Agarwal, an advocate at the Delhi High Court, said the IBC needed reforms to enable effective supervision over the implementation of the resolution plan, indicating that the current system has gaps in terms of monitoring and ensuring timely execution of approved plans. However, some lawyers suggested that while the ruling may be harsh, it sent an important message to stakeholders. 'The Supreme Court has sent a clear message—CoC cannot keep changing its stand. Resolution applicants must stick to timelines and not prolong the implementation of the plan once approved by the adjudicating authority," said Amir Bavani, founder of AB Legal. Also read | IBBI cracks the whip on a dozen insolvency professionals According to lawyers, the committee of creditors and JSW Steel may seek a review of the judgment, as the Supreme Court retains the power to review its own decisions under Article 137 of the Constitution. However, lawyers said a mere apprehension of far-reaching consequences does not, by itself, warrant an immediate review. 'Unless it can be shown that the ruling creates systemic disruption or results in gross injustice, an immediate review may not be necessary," said Tushar Kumar, a Supreme Court lawyer. The judgment is a significant setback for JSW Steel, which owns 83.3% of Bhushan Power and Steel. Acquired for around ₹ 19,000 crore, BPSL's 2.5 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) Jharsuguda plant is central to JSW Steel's eastern India strategy and accounts for about 13% of its capacity and 10-11% of its consolidated EBITDA. The ruling puts JSW Steel's revenue, operational control, and expansion plans at risk, potentially impacting cash flows and debt servicing. JSW Steel had expected value gains from BPSL's expansion, but the uncertainty now threatens its 2030 target of reaching 45 mtpa steelmaking capacity. Bhushan Power , founded in the late 1970s by Sanjay Singal, grew from a small steel processing unit into one of India's major secondary steel producers. It specialized in manufacturing cold-rolled steel strips, pipes, tubes, HR coils, and alloy steel products. During the 2000s and early 2010s, BPSL undertook aggressive expansion, particularly in Odisha, backed by large-scale borrowing from public sector banks. However, its overambitious growth plans, coupled with delays in execution and a downturn in the steel sector, led to severe financial stress. By 2017, BPSL had defaulted on loans exceeding ₹ 47,000 crore, prompting the Reserve Bank of India to classify it among the 'Dirty Dozen"—a list of top 12 non-performing corporate accounts. That year, BPSL was admitted to insolvency proceedings under the IBC. JSW Steel emerged as the successful bidder in 2019 for Bhushan Power with a ₹ 19,700 crore resolution plan. JSW Steel's resolution plan for Bhushan Power was first approved by NCLT in September 2019. However, Singal, along with several operational creditors including Jaldhi Overseas, Medi Carrier, and Kalyani Transco, challenged the resolution plan before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), alleging arbitrary claim rejections and lack of transparency. The state of Odisha also sought recovery of ₹ 139 crore in entry tax dues, though its plea was dismissed as time-barred. Additionally, CJ Darcl Logistics questioned the resolution professional's claim collation process. In February 2020, NCLAT upheld the resolution plan and dismissed all objections. This led the opposing parties—including Singal and Kalyani Transco—to move the Supreme Court in March 2020. On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled in their favour and struck down JSW Steel's plan. The Enforcement Directorate had also raised concerns given its attachment of BPSL's assets due to a money laundering investigation against the company's former promoters. The ED had initially attached these assets under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), alleging that BPSL's former promoters had diverted bank loans for personal gains. The CoC had contested the ED's action, arguing it violated IBC provisions that protect resolution applicants. NCLAT in its ruling had also rejected ED claims. The ED later withdrew its objections, citing Section 32A of the IBC, which offers immunity to resolution applicants from the liabilities of previous management. In December 2024, the ED chose not to pursue its own challenge against JSW Steel's takeover of BPSL. Following the Supreme Court's direction on 11 December, 2024, the ED returned attached assets worth ₹ 4,025 crore to JSW Steel, clearing the way for the implementation of the resolution plan. Also read | Do creditor committees in insolvency cases need an oversight body?
