Disposed

Subramani Gopalakrishnan v. Securities Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Feb 2012WP/1899/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bench disposed of writ petition staying the petitioner's appointment and market activities. Court directed SEBI to resume proceedings against petitioner while ensuring compliance with pending criminal trials in Hyderabad.

What did the court decide?

Directed SEBI to commence proceedings from May 7, 2012; prohibited petitioner from issuing certificates, accessing market, or dealing in Satyam securities during pendency.

Subramani Gopalakrishnan Vs Securities Exchange Board… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

-: 1 :-

wp- 1899/11

srp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 1899 OF 2011

¶7

Subramani Gopalkrishnan. ..Petitioner. Versus Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and Anr. ..Respondents.

¶8

Mr. F. Devitre, Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. Simil Purohit, Mr. Amol Barase i/b Udwadia & Udeshi for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Ravi Kadam and Mr. Shiraz Rustomjee, Senior Advocates alongwith Mr. Jayesh Ashar, Mr. Mobin Shaikh i/b K. Ashar & Co., for the Respondent.

¶10

Coram : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & RANJIT MORE, J. Date : February 27, 2012 .

¶11

P. C. :

¶12

The petitioner herein challenges the order dated 18^th January 2011 passed by the Whole Time Member of SEBI.

¶13

The petitioner herein has raised the same contentions which were raised in Writ Petition No. 1900 of 2011. Following the judgment rendered today in the said writ petition, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the said directions, i.e. to say :

¶14

-: 2 :-

¶15

wp- 1899/11

¶16

(i) SEBI shall commence the proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to the show cause notices dated 14^th February 20009 and 19^th February 2010 against the petitioner from the week commencing from 7^th May 2012. We may, however, add that if by that date, trial in criminal cases No. CC 1/10, CC 2/10 and CC 3/10, in progress in the Court of XXI ACMM, Hyderabad is not completed for any reason, the respondents shall ensure that the dates of hearing fixed by them do not clash with the dates fixed by the trial Court.

¶17

(ii) We further direct that during the pendency of the proceedings before SEBI pursuant to above show cause notices dated 14^th February 2009 and 19^th February 2010, the petitioner shall not :-

¶18

(a) directly or indirectly, in any manner, issue any certificate with respect to compliance of obligations of listed companies and intermediaries registered with SEBI and requirements of those made under securities laws

¶19

-: 3 :-

¶20

wp- 1899/11

¶21

{Securities & Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Depositories Act, 1996 and the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, which are administered by SEBI under section 55A thereof, the Rules, Regulations, Guidelines made under these Acts (which are administered by SEBI and the Listing Agreement};

¶22

(b) access the securities market and he is prohibited from buying, selling or dealing in the securities of Satyam and its associate listed companies in any manner whatsoever;

¶23

(c) access the securities market except for the purpose of disposing of the share in a company other the SCSL. However, in case the petitioner disposes of any shares in a company other than SCSL, the petitioner shall send an intimation to SEBI about such transaction within a week from the date of the transaction.

¶24

(iii) It will be open to SEBI to issue appropriate directions to listed companies and intermediaries registered with SEBI not to engage services of the petitioner for issuing any certificate with respect to compliance of statutory obligations which SEBI is

¶25

-: 4 :-

¶26

wp- 1899/11

¶27

competent to administer and enforce under various laws, till the disposal of above proceedings in respect of notices dated 14^th February 2009 and 19^th February 2010.

¶28

(iv) It is made clear that this order is passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and all the questions are kept open.

¶29

[CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶30

[RANJIT MORE, J.]

Subramani Gopalakrishnan v. Securities Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramani Gopalakrishnan v. Securities Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Bhikaji Jagannath Wagdhare Vs Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and 7 Ors.

Meera W/O Sadanand Kamat Vs the State of Maharashtra and 16

Mohammed Iliyas Mangroo Sheikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Samraat Kanwal Malhotra Vs Sushila B. Saklani Alias Rana and Anr.

Mr. Samraat Kanwal Malhotra Vs Sushila B. Saklani Alias Rana and Anr.

Talluri Srinivas Vs Securities Exchange Board of India and Anr.