loader image

Supreme Court Questions Bombay HC’s Blanket Stay on Investigation; Grants Liberty to Seek Reconsideration

Supreme Court Questions Bombay HC’s Blanket Stay on Investigation; Grants Liberty to Seek Reconsideration

Puneet Bhasin v. Yes Bank Ltd, [Decided on 15.12.2025]

Stay on Investigation

The Supreme Court questioned the propriety of a Bombay High Court interim order granting a blanket stay on investigation in criminal writ petitions arising from an FIR involving Yes Bank Limited, observing that the order lacked reasons and fell short of settled legal standards.

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe was hearing special leave petitions against the High Court’s order dated November 24, 2025, by which the writ petitions were admitted, and interim relief was granted in terms of prayer clause (h), effectively staying the investigation.

The Supreme Court noted that an earlier Division Bench of the High Court had, in April 2023, passed a detailed interim order directing the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation, granting limited protection from arrest, and mandating compliance with Section 41-A of the CrPC. That Bench had also indicated that the matter was fit for final hearing at the admission stage.

Taking exception to the later Bench’s approach, the Court observed that no reasons were recorded for staying the investigation and emphasised that, in light of the law laid down in Niharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2021) 19 SCC 401, High Courts must exercise caution and provide cogent reasons before granting such relief. The Bench further remarked that it was not appropriate for a subsequent Bench to virtually sit in appeal over a detailed interim order passed earlier, especially without fixing a date for further hearing.

The Supreme Court disposed of the special leave petitions with liberty to the petitioner to move the Bombay High Court by way of an application in the pending writ petitions seeking reopening and reconsideration of the interim relief in light of the issues highlighted by the Supreme Court. The Court clarified that if such an application does not yield relief, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Supreme Court again.


Appearances:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.; Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.; Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv.; Mr. Shivam Shukla, Adv.; Ms. Sanjivani Pattjoshi, Adv.; Mr. Karan Rajput, Adv.; Ms. Prangana Barua, Adv.; Mr. Shivam Bhagwati, Adv.; Mr. Pranav Saigal, Adv.; Mr. Mufaddal Paperwala, Adv.; Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

PDF Icon

Puneet Bhasin v. Yes Bank Ltd

Preview PDF