Statutory bar on cognizance under securities laws prevents Sessions Court from proceeding on a police report alone.

Offences under the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the SEBI Act, 1992 may be cognizable, so police investigation and filing of a chargesheet are not barred. However, the statutory scheme for cognizance under both enactments permits the court to proceed only on a complaint by the authorised person or authority, and that restriction is not lifted by a police report. Material gathered in investigation may support a proper complaint before the competent court, but it cannot by itself sustain cognizance on the police report before the Sessions Court. The proceedings founded on the police report were therefore liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Sessions Court could take cognizance of offences under the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 on a police report despite the statutory restriction that cognizance be taken only on a complaint.

Analysis: The offences were alleged to be cognizable, so the police could investigate and file a chargesheet. However, the provisions governing cognizance under both enactments specifically barred a court from taking cognizance except on a complaint by the statutorily authorised person or authority. The existence of a police investigation did not remove that bar. The material collected during investigation could support a complaint before the competent court, but it could not sustain cognizance on the police report before the Sessions Court.

Conclusion: The bar on cognizance applied, and the proceedings based on the police report were liable to be quashed.

---