- Tuesday, March 04, 2025
The Bombay High Cout judge said the special court order of March 1 did not attribute any specific role to the accused in the matter
By: India Weekly
THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT on Tuesday (4) stayed for four weeks a special court’s order directing FIR against former Sebi chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and five other officials for alleged stock market fraud and regulatory violations.
A single bench of Justice Shivkumar Dige said the special court order of March 1 did not attribute any specific role to the accused in the matter.
“After hearing all the parties concerned and after going through the order of the special court, it appears that the order is passed mechanically without going into details and without attributing any specific role to the applicants (Buch and others),” Justice Dige said.
“Hence, the order is stayed till next date. Four weeks time is given to the complainant in the case (Sapan Shrivastava) to file his affidavit in reply to the petitions,” the court said.
The HC’s judgment came on petitions filed by Buch, three current whole-time Sebi directors Ashwani Bhatia, Ananth Narayan G and Kamlesh Chandra Varshney, Bombay Stock Exchange’s Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Sundararaman Ramamurthy and its former chairman and public interest director Pramod Agarwal.
The pleas sought quashing of the order passed by the special court directing the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to register an FIR against them pertaining to certain allegations of fraud committed in 1994 while listing a company on the BSE.
The pleas said the order was illegal and arbitrary.
The special court had passed the order on the complaint filed by Shrivastava, a media reporter, seeking investigation into the alleged offences committed by the accused, involving large scale financial fraud, regulatory violations and corruption.
Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, appearing for the three Sebi officials, said there has been complete non-application of mind by the special court in passing the order.
“For something allegedly done in the year 1994, how can the current members of Sebi be held responsible,” Mehta argued.
He claimed that complainant Shrivastava was an extortionist who was working under the garb of being a public spirited person.
Senior counsel Amit Desai, appearing for Ramamurthy and Agarwal, said to take such an action against senior members of the BSE was an “attack on the economy itself”.
Buch’s advocate Sudeep Pasbola reiterated the arguments put forth by Mehta and Desai.
Public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, appearing for the ACB, said the bureau would comply with whatever order is passed by the HC.
Shrivastava, who appeared in person, refuted the allegations made against him by Mehta and sought time to respond to the petitions.
Special ACB court judge S E Bangar, in his March 1 order, noted there was prima facie evidence of regulatory lapses and collusion, requiring a fair and impartial probe.
The ACB court also said it will monitor the probe, and sought a status report within 30 days.
The allegations in the complaint pertained to the “fraudulent listing of a company on the stock exchange in 1994 with the active connivance of regulatory authorities”, particularly the Securities and Exchange Board of India, without compliance under the SEBI Act, 1992 and rules and regulations thereunder. (PTI)
