Bombay HC Stays Special Order Directing Ex-SEBI Chief Madhabi Buch & 5 Others

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed a special court’s order directing FIR against former SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and five other officials, pending a response from the complainant, PTI reported.

The stay will remain in effect for four weeks, with the court noting that the special order appeared to have been passed without sufficient detail.

Also read | SEBI To Challenge Court Order Of FIR Against Ex-Chief Madhabi Puri Buch

Court Finds Order Lacking Details

Justice Shivkumar Dige, who was presiding over the matter, observed that the special court’s decision from March 1 lacked necessary details, as it failed to specify the roles of the accused in the alleged stock market fraud and regulatory violations. As a result, the court stayed the order, giving the complainant, Sapan Shrivastava, four weeks to file an affidavit in response to the petitions filed by the accused.

"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 HC said.

The Bombay High Court’s decision came after petitions were filed by Buch and five other accused individuals, including three whole-time directors of SEBI—Ashwani Bhatia, Ananth Narayan G, and Kamlesh Chandra Varshney. Also named in the petitions were two BSE officials, Managing Director and CEO Ramamurthy, and former Chairman and public interest director Pramod Agarwal.

Also read | SEBI chief says she complied with all required disclosures

The accused sought the quashing of the special court’s order, claiming it was illegal and arbitrary. The special court had ordered an FIR against them about a complaint filed by Shrivastava, a media reporter. The complaint alleged that the accused were involved in financial fraud, regulatory violations, and corruption while listing a company on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) in 1994.

The complaint filed by Shrivastava raised serious concerns over large-scale financial fraud and regulatory violations that allegedly occurred during the listing of the company in 1994. The special court had directed the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to register an FIR against the accused officials. However, the Bombay High Court found merit in the petitioners’ argument that the order lacked sufficient detail and justification.

The matter now awaits further proceedings, with the complainant being given time to respond.