Last month, the High Court had put an interim stay on the special court's order, saying that the order was passed mechanically and no specific role of the accused was mentioned in it.
In a major relief to ex-Sebi chief Madhabi Puri Buch and five other officials, who are accused of alleged stock market and regulatory violations, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday extended the interim stay on a special court's order directing the registration of an FIR.
Last month, the Bombay High Court granted the interim stay on the special court's order, noting it was passed mechanically and no specific role was attributed to the accused.
What Did The High Court Say?
Justice Shivkumar Dige on Tuesday noted that the original complainant in the case has filed an affidavit and granted time to Buch and others to go through the same.
Justice Dige stated that the interim relief granted earlier will continue until further orders, as reported by PTI. The matter has been posted for further hearing on May 7.
Buch Approched The High Court
Last month, Buch, three sitting whole-time directors of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) — Ashwani Bhatia, Anant Narayan G and Kamlesh Chandra Varshney — Bombay Stock Exchange managing director and chief executive officer Sundararaman Ramamurthy and former BSE chairman and public interest director Pramod Agrawal had approached the high court against the special court order.
The petitions sought quashing of the order passed by the special court directing the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to register an FIR against him relating to certain allegations of fraud while listing a company on the BSE in 1994.
The petitions claimed the special court order was "manifestly erroneous, patently illegal and passed without jurisdiction".
The special court passed the order on a complaint filed by media reporter Sapan Srivastava seeking investigation into alleged offences involving large-scale financial fraud, regulatory violations and corruption by the accused.
Special ACB court judge S E Bangar in his March 1 order said there was prima facie evidence of regulatory lapses and collusion, which required an impartial investigation. The ACB court also said that it will monitor the investigation and sought a status report within 30 days.
Read More | Hindenburg Allegations Against SEBI: What SEBI Said, How Is Adani Linked Again | Key Facts
The allegations in the complaint pertained to "fraudulent listing of a company on the stock exchange in 1994 with the active connivance of regulatory authorities", particularly the Sebi, without compliance under the SEBI Act, 1992 and rules and regulations thereunder.
What Did The SEBI Say?
The Sebi last month said the application (by Shrivastava) sought directions for the police to register an FIR and investigate into the alleged irregularities in granting listing permission to a company on the BSE in 1994, without complying with provisions of the SEBI Act, 1992, SEBI (ICDR) Regulations, 2018, and the SEBI (LODR) Regulations, 2015.
"Even though these officials were not holding their respective positions at the relevant point of time, the court allowed the application without issuing any notice or granting any opportunity to SEBI to place the facts on record," the market regulator said in a statement.
The BSE had said the application sought directions for registration of an FIR and investigations into alleged irregularities in the listing of Cals Refineries Ltd at BSE in 1994.
"The officials named in the application were not in their respective positions at the time of listing and were not connected with the company at all," it said, adding the application is "frivolous and vexatious in nature".