Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 30 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2026-01-09 partly_allowed

YERRAM VIJAY KUMAR … vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR

Bench: 2 — J.K. Maheshwari, K. Vinod Chandran

In Brief

In a dispute over company control, private complaint filed allegations of fraud under the Companies Act, 2013. The Supreme Court held that sections 448 and 451—which prescribe punishment for false statements and repeated defaults—are inextricably linked to Section 447 (fraud), the substantive penal provision. Since Section 212(6) restricts cognizance of "offences covered under Section 447" to complaints by the SFIO or Central Government authorities, not private complaints, the Special Court lacked jurisdiction. The Court partly allowed the appeal, quashing proceedings under Sections 448 and 451 while permitting Indian Penal Code offences to proceed before a competent criminal court.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Law Corporate Law Companies Act, 2013 Fraud and Forgery Criminal Procedure Jurisdiction Special Courts Inherent Powers of High Court

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login