The Supreme Court has ruled that all criminal charges against Sterling Biotech promoters Nitin and Chetan Sandesara will be dropped if they pay ₹5,100 crore by December 17.
These are the same men who fled India, took Albanian passports, and stayed out of reach while the CBI, ED, SFIO, and FEOA chased them for years.
Now, one cheque may wipe the slate clean.
If this sounds like a scene from a crime thriller, that is because it practically is. Except this time, it is unfolding in the real world. Although the court has clarified it to be a one-off case, consequences will not remain confined. They will ripple across India’s entire fight against financial crime.
The idea that a fugitive can run away from Indian law, build a life abroad, and then return to the negotiation table with a simple ‘settlement offer’ is not just bizarre. It is troubling. It sends a message that is as clear as it is dangerous:
‘Flee first, negotiate later, and if you are rich enough, buy your way out.’
This strikes at the very heart of deterrence. Criminal law is meant to punish wrongdoing, not convert it into a bargaining chip. When the system treats financial crime as a recoverable loan rather than a punishable offence, it rewards risk-taking criminals over honest citizens.
What About the Public Money Lost?
The Sandesaras did not default on a home loan. Their company owed banks and public financial institutions thousands of crores. Every rupee lost is a rupee that honest taxpayers eventually compensate for.
So what message do they receive?
‘Do not worry. Someone else will pay. Someone always does.’
Meanwhile, the individuals who siphoned off public money may now walk free without jail time. They may lose some assets, but they keep their freedom.
A Blow to Every Investigating Agency
CBI, ED, SFIO, FEOA.
Four major agencies spent years investigating the Sandesara brothers. They collected evidence, filed charges, tracked financial trails, and even pursued red notices.
Imagine the precedent this creates.
Why should future fugitives fear the ED if they can later return with an offer?
Why should investigators fight legal battles if the accused can end them with a payment?
It reduces the criminal justice system to a negotiation table.
A Fight That Must Continue
To be fair, the government may still seek a review of this ruling. But as it stands today, the judgment is nothing short of a disaster for India’s fight against financial crime.
It is not about one pair of businessmen.
It is about the signal this gives to every potential white-collar offender.
It is about whether India wants justice to be punitive and preventive, or transactional and negotiable.
If fugitives can come back with a cheque and wipe away years of wrongdoing, then the next generation of financial criminals will only be smarter, faster, and bolder.
This is not just a legal question.
This is a moral one.
And India cannot afford to get it wrong.
