Mumbai: In a major relief to the former SEBI chairperson and five others, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed the special court’s order directing the registration of an FIR against them in connection with an alleged stock market fraud and regulatory violations dating back to 1994.

The court noted that the special judge had passed the order mechanically, without examining the details or attributing any specific role to the accused.

Observation Made By Justice Shivkumar Dige

“It appears that the learned judge (special ACB judge) has passed the order mechanically, without going into the details and without attributing any specific role to the applicants. Hence, the order is stayed till the next date,” Justice Shivkumar Dige ordered.

Bombay HC Stays The Order

The HC stayed the order while hearing petitions filed by Buch, three current whole-time SEBI directors — Ashwani Bhatia, Ananth Narayan G, and Kamlesh Chandra Varshney — and two BSE officials — Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Ramamurthy, and its former chairman and public interest director, Pramod Agarwal.

On March 1, the special court had directed the Anti-Corruption Bureau to register an FIR against the six individuals.

They approached the HC on Monday, seeking to quash the special court’s order, contending that it was “unjust” and “harsh.” The officials argued that none of them held their current positions in 1994 and that the trial court ought to have recognized that “no vicarious liability can be fastened” on them.

Arguments Made By Solicitor General Of India

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the three whole-time SEBI directors, submitted that the complainant, Sapan Shrivastava, was a habitual litigant. He also pointed out that the high court had previously imposed a cost of Rs5 lakh on him for filing a frivolous petition.

Terming Shrivastava’s allegations vague, Mehta argued that no specific accusations had been leveled against the officials. He said the complainant sought a probe into an IPO from 1994, when the six officials were not holding any positions in SEBI or BSE.

“No averments, no explanations given — just a statement that SEBI has failed to discharge its duties. The complaint has been filed against officers who are in office now, for an alleged offense presumed to have taken place in 1994. How can they be held responsible?” Mehta questioned.

Arguments Made By Senior Advocate Amit Desai, Representing The Two BSE Officials

Senior advocate Amit Desai, representing the two BSE officials, said the complainant had made scandalous statements with serious ramifications for the economy, as vague allegations were being made against members of the principal capital market regulatory body.

Further, Desai argued that the special court judge had erred by not ensuring compliance with the Prevention of Corruption Act, which requires sanction for investigating public servants.

“Today’s economy largely survives on an inflow of funds. Taking this type of action (ordering the registration of an FIR) is an attack on the country’s economy. Such action against a market regulator — how frivolous can it get? Unfortunately, the judge did not realize the extent of the matter,” Desai submitted.

Moreover, Desai pointed out that the company in question had been delisted from the BSE in 2019, while the complaint was filed before the court in March 2024.

Senior advocate Sudeep Pasbola, appearing for Buch, also argued that action could not have been taken based on vague allegations made by the complainant.

The complainant, Shrivastava, sought time to file a reply to the petitions.

Justice Dige granted time for the reply and scheduled the matter for hearing after four weeks while staying the special court’s order.

Beed (Maharashtra): Maratha quota activist Manoj Jarange has said that the resignation of Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde is not enough and has demanded that murder charges be filed against him in connection with the killing of sarpanch Santosh Deshmukh.

Munde, who was Maharashtra’s Food and Civil Supplies Minister and an MLA from Parli, resigned from the state cabinet after his close aide, Walmik Karad, was identified as the mastermind behind Deshmukh’s murder. His resignation followed mounting pressure from the opposition and public outrage over the brutal killing.

Visit to Massajog and Calls for Strict Action

Jarange visited Massajog village in Beed to meet Deshmukh’s family after graphic images of the murder went viral. Speaking to reporters, he stated, “Munde’s resignation as a minister is not enough. He should also step down as an MLA, and murder charges should be filed against him.”

He alleged that the accused in the case were closely associated with Munde and that the money collected through their activities was reaching him.

The Case & Investigation

The demand for Munde’s resignation intensified after shocking details emerged in the court chargesheet, revealing the brutalities committed before Deshmukh’s murder.

Deshmukh was allegedly abducted, tortured, and killed on December 9, 2023, for attempting to stop an extortion racket targeting an energy company in the district.

On February 27, the state Crime Investigation Department (CID) filed a 1,200-page chargesheet in a Beed district court, detailing Deshmukh’s murder and two related cases.

Fighting For Justice

Jarange emphasized the need to dismantle the extortion network in Beed, stating, “The only job now is to destroy this racket. But some people are so consumed by money and power that they will go to any extent for it.”

Deshmukh’s brother, Dhananjay Deshmukh, said the past few months had been unbearable and had left him emotionally shattered. He also alleged that some politicians had pressured the former superintendent of police in Beed to suppress the case.

With public outrage growing, demands for stricter action against those involved are gaining momentum, keeping the case in the political spotlight.

Mumbai: The installment for February 2025 under the Ladki Bahin scheme will be credited to beneficiaries’ accounts by March 7, just before International Women’s Day (March 8), as announced by Women and Child Development Minister Aditi Tatkare.

This initiative provides ₹1,500 monthly to women aged 21-65 from families with annual incomes under ₹2.5 lakh. Tatkare confirmed the government’s commitment to the scheme, stating that disbursement will commence on March 5 and the March installment will also be credited before the month ends.

Tatkare Dismisses Claims On Discontinuation Of Scheme

Tatkare dismissed opposition claims regarding the discontinuation of the scheme and insisted that 80 lakh women are not at risk of exclusion. On International Women’s Day, special programmes are planned, and the February installment will be disbursed on that day.

While questioned about raising the monthly payout from ₹1,500 to ₹2,100, promised during last year’s Assembly elections, Tatkare stated that decisions would be made by the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Ministers.

Minister reaffirmed the program’s success, highlighting that 2.5 crore women had benefited from it, implying that opposition concerns stem from their frustration at this achievement.

Ladki Bahin Latest Installment

The January installment of Ladki Bahin Yojana has started coming into the accounts of women. Under this ambitious scheme of the Maharashtra government, Finance Minister Ajit Pawar had assured to pay the installment by January 26. The seventh installment of January is being deposited from the night of January 24.

Under the scheme, eligible women are given Rs 1500 every month. So far six installments have been deposited. Women have been advised to check their bank accounts linked to Aadhaar. If SMS is not received, check the statement from the bank app or branch. In the future, after a proposal in the budget session, it is planned to increase this amount to Rs 2100.

Four Thousand Women Pull Out From Ladki Bahin Scheme

Prior to the verification initiative aimed at removing women who do not fulfill the eligibility requirements from the ‘Ladki Bahin’ scheme, over four thousand women statewide have applied for ‘no scheme’.

As per high-ranking officials from the Women and Child Development Department, local government offices are receiving applications to halt the scheme’s benefits. This ‘retraction of applications’ appears to be occurring because of the concern over having to repay the benefit amount received, along with a fine, if they are deemed ineligible during the verification process.