Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

Appeal No.5981 of 2024 filed by Krishnam Parasramka

SEBI
Apr 24, 2024

BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY

(Under the Right to Information Act, 2005)

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

Appeal No. 5981 of 2024

Krishnam Parasramka : Appellant Vs

CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai : Respondent

ORDER

1. The appellant had filed an application dated March 19, 2024 (received by the respondent through RTI MIS Portal) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 ("RTI Act"). The respondent, by a letter dated April 05, 2024 responded to the application filed by the appellant. The appellant filed an appeal (Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/24/00075) dated April 08, 2024. I have carefully considered the application, the response and the appeal and find that the matter can be decided based on the material available on record.

2. Requests in the application -The appellant, vide his application dated March 19, 2024, sought the following information regarding proceedings pending against Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limited and Wallace Brothers Trading and Industrial Corporation Limited:

"Copy of Reply provided by the company and Promoters Copy of Interim Order passed by SEBI in the matter Copy of penalty issued to Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limited and Wallace Brothers Trading and Industrial Corporation Limited for wrongful classification of promoter and public shareholding Copy of any other orders passed in the matter"

3. Reply of the Respondent - The respondent, in response to the aforesaid request, informed that the proceedings in the matter are under examination and have not reached a logical conclusion. In view of same, disclosure of details related to the matter may impede the process and is therefore, exempt from disclosure in terms of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.

1

4. Ground of appeal - The appellant has filed the appeal on the ground that he has been refused access to information requested.

5. I have perused the requests and the response provided thereto. I note that the respondent has clearly informed that the examination in the matter is ongoing and the same has not reached a logical conclusion. On consideration, I agree with the response of the respondent that disclosure of the requested information at this stage may impede the process of examination. In this context, I note that the Hon'ble Central Information Commission, (hereinafter referred to as "CIC") in the matter of Smt. Pushpa Devi Mohta vs. SEBI (order dated February 08, 2022), held that " The Commission observes that the information sought by the appellant is submitted to SEBI which is a quasi-judicial body for examination and the same has not yet reached a logical conclusion, therefore the respondent has denied the information under section 8(1)(h) and as per the said provisions of the RTI Act, such information cannot be provided to the appellant which would impede the process of investigation…….In view of the above ratio, the Commission is of the opinion that the CPIO has rightly denied the information sought under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act as the forensic audit report is still pending and final decision is yet to be passed by the competent authority, therefore the said denial of information is being upheld by the Commission." I also note that the Hon'ble CIC, in the matter of Deepti Maheshwari vs. CPIO, SEBI (Order dated February 09, 2023), observed that "The Commission also accepted the submissions advanced by the CPIO qua queries 8, 10 and 11 that since the proceedings were on-going, the disclosure of any information at that juncture may have impeded the process of investigation/ prosecution of offenders. Therefore, the denial u/s 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act, 2005 was upheld." In view of these observations, I do not find any deficiency in the response. Notwithstanding the above, any regulatory actions taken by SEBI are published on SEBI website. The appellant may accordingly be guided by the same.

6. In view of the above observations, I find that there is no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Place: Mumbai B RAJENDRAN Date: April 24, 2024 APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE RTI ACT

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2