 "SC to hear plea to implead CBI in DLF case")
The appeal, dated Wednesday, said the case had acquired a new dimension “as it appears CBI is investigating”. It added the CBI’s report on this issue would be crucial for the adjudication of the matter.
The complainant cited a July article in The Economic Times, which said the CBI had sought information from Sebi on the DLF case. According to the news report, the investigative agency had written to Sebi in June, saying it had received a complaint from a “respectable and credible” person in connection with the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) order that set aside the ban imposed on the realtor by Sebi. The regulator has challenged the SAT order in the Supreme Court.
Following DLF’s recent announcement that it was raising around Rs 12,000 crore by divesting stakes in rental properties, Sebi filed an application seeking a stay on such fund-raising. The appeal quoted the CBI letter to Sebi: “It is requested that the present status (of the DLF case), along with chronological events in the matter, may please be forwarded to this office through an officer of Sebi who was associated with the matter for discussion.”
When contacted, a DLF spokesperson said in an email, “The Sebi application is listed for November 4. We have no further comments to offer at this stage.”
On Friday, the DLF stock fell 3.57 per cent on the National Stock Exchange, closing at Rs 116.10.
In an order dated October 10, 2014, Sebi had restrained DLF and its six senior executives from accessing the securities market for three years. The entities named in the Sebi order include Rajiv Singh (vice-chairman), T C Goyal (managing director), Pia Singh (whole-time director), Kameshwar Swarup (executive director, legal), G S Talwar (director) and Ramesh Sanka (chief financial officer).
In March, SAT had quashed the Sebi order, stating the case was one of over-regulation by the market regulator and had led to grave miscarriage of justice. Of the three-member SAT bench, Jog Singh and A S Lamba had favoured quashing the ban, while presiding officer J P Devadhar was in favour of a six-month ban.
In April, Sebi moved the Supreme Court. In its appeal, the regulator contested several grounds of the SAT order, including the SAT observation that the Sebi board’s clearance was not secured before initiating investigation proceedings. Sebi’s contented as it was a quasi-judicial body, it was empowered to act on its own accord.
The case relates to non-disclosure of certain information by the company during its IPO in 2007, which had garnered about Rs 9,000 crore.