Kindly look into the attachment.
Learned HC has ruled in favour of rule of law and has made it clear that:
"No person shall be adversely affected
merely on the basis of suspicion. It is a cardinal principle of law
that unless and until the charge or guilt is proved, a person
cannot be condemned or punished.”
has defeated bank's plea that:
"Court should not sit over the decision of the expert body."
the bank has been defeated as bank attempted to take refuge Termination simplicitor is not stigmatic and no enquiry is required before passing the order of Termination simplicitor.
The decision of the learned court is in favour of Palak and hence you since your case is absoloutely same as that of Palak.
You should feel relieved. However kindly seek the opinion of your lawyer for further action.
This judgment may be a landmark judgment and may become guiding one for times to come.