SEBI

SEBI’s power to revisit penalty orders, including Nil penalties, under Section 15-I (3) of the SEBI Act, 1992

Summary: Section 15-I (3) of the SEBI Act, 1992, empowers SEBI to revisit and enhance penalties imposed by the adjudicating officer, including orders where no penalty is imposed, within a period of three months from the date of passing of the order. However, this power can be exercised only if the order passed by the adjudicating officer is erroneous and not in the interests of the securities market. This revisionary power represents a critical component of SEBI’s regulatory framework — it allows the market regulator to modify orders passed by the adjudicating officer.Continue Reading SEBI’s power to revisit penalty orders, including Nil penalties, under Section 15-I (3) of the SEBI Act, 1992

Is SEBI obligated to provide only the documents it relies upon?

Summary: This blog analyses the duty of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) to disclose documents during regulatory proceedings. It traces the judicial evolution of SEBI’s disclosure obligations and discusses contrasting judicial views on the extent and limits of such obligation.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”), as a regulator and a quasi-judicial body, is dutybound to act fairly and adhere to the principles of natural justice while conducting proceedings against parties. One such duty is to grant noticees access to the material that form the basis of the findings/ allegations made against them in the show cause notice.Continue Reading Is SEBI obligated to provide only the documents it relies upon?

Expanding the Regulatory Framework: Deep dive into SEBI’s new AML/CFT guidelines

INTRODUCTION

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI’), through its Master Circular dated June 06, 2024, issued ‘Guidelines on Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) Standards and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (“CFT”)/ Obligations of Securities Market Intermediaries under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002,’ (“Master Circular/2024 Guidelines”),[1] emphasising the need for stricter AML/ CFT measures in the securities market, given global efforts against drug trafficking, terrorism, and other serious crimes. The 2024 Guidelines supersede the SEBI AML/ CFT Guidelines of February 03, 2023 (“2023 Guidelines”),[2] strengthening the obligations of market intermediaries and aligning with international standards from the Financial Action Task Force (“FATF”).Continue Reading Expanding the Regulatory Framework: Deep dive into SEBI’s new AML/CFT guidelines

Navigating ESG Compliance: Lessons from Recent Trends and the Santos Case

In an era marked by growing environmental consciousness and regulatory oversight, companies across the globe are facing heightened scrutiny over their sustainability claims. The recent lawsuit[1] against Santos Ltd., a major Australian energy company, serves as a wake-up call for corporations navigating the evolving landscape of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) compliance. This article explores key takeaways from this landmark case, highlights the current ESG regulatory framework in India, and provides practical guidance for companies and investors to avoid similar pitfalls.Continue Reading Navigating ESG Compliance: Lessons from Recent Trends and the Santos Case

Scope of summoning Indian nationals for virtual testimonies by Securities and Exchange Commission- Legal limits by local laws and international cooperation framework

Introduction

International law enforcement authorities are increasingly relying on mutual cooperation to obtain evidence or information outside their jurisdictional authority. Conducting joint investigations into prospective securities law violations, spanning countries, is also becoming common practice. This article discusses the scope and powers of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to seek/ obtain documents and witness testimonies from an Indian national involved in potential securities law violations abroad, which may have implications in the United States.Continue Reading Scope of summoning Indian nationals for virtual testimonies by Securities and Exchange Commission- Legal limits by local laws and international cooperation framework

Obligations placed on stockbrokers to curb fraud and money laundering

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) has held that preventing and detecting fraud or market abuse is a key pillar of investor protection. Consequently, SEBI has been relentless in introducing and amending rules, regulations, and circulars to regulate practices tantamount to fraud or market abuse.Continue Reading Obligations placed on stockbrokers to curb fraud and money laundering

SEBI’s efforts to curtail front running: Increasing onus on Asset Management Companies

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) in its 205th board meeting[1] held on April 30, 2024, has approved amendments to the SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 (“MF Regulations”), to enhance the existing regulatory framework for Asset Management Companies (“AMCs”) for facilitating identification and deterrence of potential market abuse, including front running[2]. As part of the said decision, detailed in its press release dated April 30, 2024, AMCs would be required to put in place an appropriate institutional mechanism, consisting of enhanced surveillance systems, internal control procedures and escalation processes to identify, monitor and address various types of misconduct. Additionally, SEBI’s Board has approved amendments in the relevant regulations to enhance responsibility and accountability of the management of AMCs for the said institutional mechanism and also for AMCs to put in place a whistle-blower mechanism.Continue Reading SEBI’s efforts to curtail front running: Increasing onus on Asset Management Companies

Relevant or Relied Upon? Bombay High Court Clears Air on Disclosure of Information by Banks in Wilful Defaulter Proceedings

In Mr. Milind Patel v. Union Bank of India & Ors.[1] (“Judgment”), the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court (“Court”) has inter alia held that lenders/ banks seeking to invoke the Reserve Bank of India, Master Circular on Wilful Defaulters (“Master Circular”) for declaring entities and/ or persons as wilful defaulters, must supply all relevant materials to the noticee, which includes not only incriminating material but also exculpatory material. The Court therefore clarified that a bank is obligated to provide all relevant materials and not just information ‘referred to’ and ‘relied upon’ in the show-cause notice when conducting proceedings under the Master Circular.Continue Reading Relevant or Relied Upon? Bombay High Court Clears Air on Disclosure of Information by Banks in Wilful Defaulter Proceedings

SAT’s Verdict in FCRPL & others V. SEBI: Setting the dust on interpretation of generally available information in Insider Trading Cases

Introduction:

For any information to be classified as unpublished price sensitive information (“UPSI”), it should primarily satisfy the following three criteria, (1) It should relate to the company or its securities, directly or indirectly, (2) It should not be generally available, and (3) There should be a likelihood of the information materially affecting the price of the securities. Generally available information is information available in the public domain (on a non-discriminatory basis). Basis this, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) analyses and identifies whether information can be termed as UPSI and classifies whether trades conducted by Insiders[1] are in violation of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015 (“2015 PIT Regulations”).Continue Reading SAT’s Verdict in FCRPL & others V. SEBI: Settling the dust on interpretation of Generally Available Information in Insider Trading Cases