IN THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Appeal No. 157 of 2007
Date of decision : 23.10.2007
|
Mr. Ramesh K. Jain
|
…… Appellant
|
|
Versus
|
|
|
Securities and Exchange Board of India
|
…… Respondent
|
Dr. S.K. Jain, Practicing Company Secretary for the Appellant.
Mr. Devanshu Desai Advocate for the Respondent.
Coram : Justice N.K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer
Arun Bhargava, Member
Utpal Bhattacharya, Member
Per : Justice N.K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer (Oral)
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short the Board) had ordered investigations into the dealings in the scrip of Aditya Infosoft Limited (for short the company). During the course of the investigations the investigating authority issued several notices to the appellant requiring him to furnish the details of his dealings in the shares of the company. The appellant failed to comply with the said summons and also failed to submit the information to the investigating authority. Adjudication proceedings were initiated against him and the adjudicating officer found that the appellant had violated the provisions of section 11C read with section 15A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for short the Act) in as much as he failed to furnish the information to the investigating officer during the course of the investigations. Accordingly, by his order dated August 1, 2007 he imposed a monetary penalty of Rs.5 lacs on the appellant. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed.
The learned authorized representative of the appellant has conceded before us that his client had failed to furnish the information to the investigating officer. He states that the appellant is a sick person whose blood sugar levels are extremely high and that he is also suffering from hypertension and it is for health reasons that he could not appear before the investigating authority despite several notices. He has taken us through the medical certificates and blood reports of the appellant which are on the record. It appears that he is unwell. The authorized representative of the appellant informs us that proceedings under section 11B of the Act have also been initiated against the appellant and that the inquiry is over in which a recommendation has been made that he be debarred from accessing the capital market for a period of six months. The learned authorized representative states that on account of falling health the appellant has stopped his business and is facing financial difficulties. In these circumstances, he prays that a lenient view be taken. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the quantum of penalty levied by the adjudicating officer is reduced to Rs.1 lac. We order accordingly. Let the penalty amount be paid within 45 days from today. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to the costs.
Sd/-
Justice N.K. Sodhi
Presiding Officer
Sd/-
Arun Bhargava
Member
Sd/-
Utpal Bhattacharya
Member
23.10.2007
bbn