Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the FIR and subsequent proceedings registered against a SEBI-registered investment adviser, alleging cheating, breach of trust and violations connected with investment advisory activity, were liable to be quashed in view of the statutory bar under the SEBI Act and the nature of the alleged misconduct.
Analysis: The alleged conduct arose out of an investment advisory business already registered with SEBI. The Court found that, on the material placed, the allegations principally concerned breach of SEBI regulations and the SEBI Act rather than a direct case of cheating or criminal breach of trust by a private complainant. The Court also noted that the SEBI Act creates a specific regime for cognizance of offences, including a bar that only a complaint by SEBI Board can found cognizance before the competent Special Court. In that setting, continuation of police investigation on the basis of the FIR was held to be beyond the permissible sphere where the matter fell within the statutory SEBI framework. The Court further held that the police ought to have placed the alleged violations before SEBI instead of proceeding by FIR in a case governed by the special statute.
Conclusion: The FIR and all subsequent proceedings were quashed, and the petition was allowed.