The former president of the Securities and Exchange Office of India (SEBI), Madhabi Puri Buch, and three full -time administrators approached the High Court of Bombay to cancel an order adopted by a court of Mumbai, ordering a case against them in a case of registration fraud. This occurs after Sebi has published a statement indicating that it would take legal action against said decision. He also rejected the complaint as coming from a “frivolous and usual litigant”.
According to a bar and bench report, the case was mentioned before judge SC Dige and should be heard tomorrow. The solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the officials of SEBI.
The High Court of Bombay had ordered the anti-corruption office (ACB) to record a case against them. The case concerned allegations of financial fraud and regulatory violations concerning the registration of a company on the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1994. The main lawyer Amit Desai represented the officials of the ESB.
Ashwani Bhatia, Annanth Narayan G and Kamlesh Chandra Varshney are the three directors of Sebi in whole time and Pramod Agarwal and Sundararaman Ramamurthy are the two ESB officials.
The report indicated that a situation report on the survey should be submitted in the next 30 days.
A Sapan Shrivastava, a journalist from Dombivali, filed a request requesting an investigation into alleged irregularities in the company’s list. He said the list had taken place against the standards of the 1992 SEBI law, and that Buch and the administrators did not exercise their regulatory functions. The accused were also engaged in market manipulation, the offense of initiate and the artificial inflation of equity prices, which have frauded investors and violated the law on the prevention of corruption, said the complainant.
“Even if these officials did not hold their respective positions at the relevant moment, the court granted the request without issuing notice or granting any opportunity to SEBI to file the facts. The applicant is known to be a frivolous and usual litigant, previous requests being rejected by the court, with a taxation of costs in certain cases. SEBI would initiate the appropriate legal measures to contest this order and remain determined to ensure regulatory compliance due to all questions, “said SEBI in his answer before moving the court.
