Back to feed
IndiaCriminal
Sanofi India Ltd vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- Sep 7, 2026
- Citation
- 2026 INSC 957
- Judges
- J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra
AI breakdown
- Sanofi India is accused of conspiring with a BARC official to inflate medicine contract prices and offering bribes.
- The Supreme Court decided the prosecution can continue against Sanofi even without naming specific employees involved.
- The decision relies on the principle that a company can be held liable for crimes independent of individual employees.
Parties
Applicant
Sanofi India Ltd
Respondent
Central Bureau Of Investigation
Judgment text (excerpt)
Sanofi India Ltd vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 7 September, 2026
2026 INSC 957
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 4250 OF 2026
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 3597 of 2019)
SANOFI INDIA LTD. …APPELLANT
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION …RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Date: 2026.09.07
15:53:58 IST
Reason:
J.B. PARDIWALA, J.
For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following
parts:
A. FACTUAL MATRIX _____________________________________________ 3
B. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES ________________________________ 5
I. Submissions on behalf of the Appellant _________________________ 5
II. Submission on behalf of the Respondent_________________________ 7
C. ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION __________________________________ 7
D. ANALYSIS _____________________________________________________ 7
I. Introduction to corporate criminal liability _______________________ 8
II. Corporate criminal liability and the attribution question: position in
England and Wales _______________________________________________ 12
(a) Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. v. Nattrass ___________________________ 16
(b) Meridian Global Funds Management Asia Ltd v. Securities
Commission ____________________________________________________ 28
(c) The Barclays Cases __________________________________________ 36
(i) Meridian Principles ____________________________________ 37
(ii) Test for Determining Attribution ________________________ 39
(iii) Application to facts ____________________________________ 43
(iv) Aspects of Divergence__________________________________ 47
(d) Developments in law post Barclays ____________________________ 49
(e) Summary ____…
Source: Indian Kanoon (indiankanoon.org). Indian court judgments are public records; the summary and translations are AI-generated.