Gujarat High Court Civil Manual (subordinate court practice), 1960
(i) All clear cases of offences committed during Insolvency Proceedings with the intention of defrauding creditors need deterrent punishments. (ii) Attention is drawn to the necessity of enforcing strictly the provisions of section 22 and utilizing, when necessary the provisions of section 69 against a debtor who has wilfully failed to perform the duties imposed on him thereunder. (iii) The following principles should be observed in applying the provisions of section 29 of the Act. In any case in which the suit is merely one to establish a claim which if insolvency would be a provable debt or liability the correct course clearly is to stay the suit in order that the plaintiff's claim may be proved in the insolvency and give leave to prove for the costs incurred in the suit. It is much better that it should be proved in the insolvency than that a law suit should go on either against the insolvent who has no interest or his receiver. The only cases in which suits should be allowed to go on against the insolvent or his receiver are cases in which the insolvent has an interest of his own, or cases in which the plaintiff is insisting upon a right which is not a mere claim to a provable debt, e.g., where the plaintiff is a mortgagee insisting upon his security.