CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petition in 'Public Interest' as Rooted in Personal Grievances Related to Insolvency Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court today dismissed a writ petition filed by renowned cardiac surgeon Dr. K.M. Cherian, observing that the petition, purportedly in the public interest, was in fact related to his specific grievance regarding the insolvency proceedings against Frontier Lifeline Private Limited (FLPL).

The bench comprising the Chief Justice and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Satish Chandra Sharma noted, "The above narration will clearly indicate that what is now preferred as a petition, which was purportedly filed in the public interest, is, in fact, relatable to the petitioner’s specific grievance in regard to proceedings of insolvency against FLPL." This observation underlined the Court's rationale for not entertaining the petition.

Dr. Cherian, a Padma Shri awardee and pioneer in pediatric cardiac surgery in India, had established FLPL and Frontier Mediville, aiming to bridge the gaps in affordable healthcare and research. However, he faced substantial challenges due to regulatory delays, financial roadblocks, and insolvency proceedings, leading to the shutdown of Frontier Mediville.

The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 (Union of India) to create guidelines for medical research approvals, facilitate the growth of private medical research institutions, and examine the alleged irregularities in the insolvency proceedings of FLPL.

The Court observed that the petition appeared to be a facade of public interest to address personal grievances. "We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain a petition purportedly in the public interest on the above ground," the order stated, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

 Date of Decision: 25-01-2024

K.M. Cherian VS Union Of India & Ors.           

 

Latest Legal News