The article examines two Supreme Court rulings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) that reveal troubling inconsistencies. In the BPSL case, JSW Steel’s ₹19,350 crore resolution plan—initially approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and NCLT—was overturned by the Supreme Court in May 2025, citing procedural lapses such as delay, improper financial instruments, and non-compliance with Section 29A. The judgment criticized the CoC and Resolution Professional for dereliction of duty, raising concerns over investor trust. Conversely, in the DHFL case, where Piramal Capital’s resolution plan addressed ₹87,248 crore in claims, the Court upheld the plan in April 2025 despite allegations of illegality, irregularity, bias and the exclusion of retail investors or ex-promoters from decision-making. Praising the CoC’s conduct, the Court reaffirmed creditor rights but overlooked unequal stakeholder treatment. The article argues that these diverging judgments expose the fragility of the IBC, highlight unchecked CoC power, and underscore the urgent need for a more transparent, inclusive, and just insolvency framework.