2020 (1) TMI 1201

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and/or prohibition, or any writ, order or direction analogous thereto, calling for the records and proceedings pertaining to the Impugned Notice dated 31 August 2018 issued by Respondent No.1 and after examining the validity, legality and propriety thereof, quash and/or set aside the same and declare it non est, void and unenforceable; (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or any writ, order or direction analogous thereto, to Respondent No.1 for the grant of full, free and unhindered inspection of all material gathered in the course of investigations by Respondent No.1, which culminated in the Investigation Report bearing No.IVD/ID2/2015-16/11 and/or the Impugned Notice dated 31 August 2018 issued by R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....says that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the respondent No.1 before us, has received certain complaints from New Delhi Television Limited, referred to hereinafter as 'NDTV', on 16.7.2013, 27.12.2013 and 9.1.2014 inter alia alleging that Sanjay Dutt and certain entities referred in paragraph 1 of the notice were involved in dealing with securities of NDTV in violation of the aforenoted regulations. 6. The period covered by the show-cause notice is from September 2006 to June, 2008 and the copies of the complaints are attached as Annexure 1 to the show-cause notice. The SEBI alleges that it conducted investigation into the suspected insider trading in the scrips of NDTV during the period from September 1, 2006 to June 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs took inspection of the documents provided by respondent No.1 but complain that the petitioners were not provided inspection of the investigation report, internal file notings or orders. The petitioners did file a reply to the show-cause notice on 31.7.2019 and inter alia urged that the notice was hopelessly time barred. There was a hearing on this show-cause notice scheduled on 26.9.2019 and the petitioners do not deny that this hearing was offered and was adjourned from time to time. However, the entire petition proceeds on the allegation or averment that only partial inspection has been granted. The inspection is not full, fair and complete. It is also not denied that a Writ Petition with a similar grievance was filed in the Honourable....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... without the inspection of all materials being provided to the petitioners. 9. We do not think that we should allow the petition to be prosecuted as its obvious purpose is to delay the adjudication of the show-cause notice. It is not as if the petitioners cannot appear before SEBI without prejudice to their rights and contentions and complaint that they were not provided full, free and unhindered inspection of the relevant records and documents. The petitioners can participate in the hearing or adjudication of the show-cause notice without prejudice to all their rights and contentions including on the above point. They can very well substantiate their primary contention that on the face of it, the show-cause notice is time barred. We do ....