Mr. Dheeraj Shah vs Sebi

Date of Decision: 14.10.2019

Appeal No.59 of 2019

Mr. Dheeraj Shah Mrs. Sheetal Dheeraj Shah 23-A, 12 Akash CHS., Zalawad Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Kandivali (East), Mumbai - 400101. ... Appellant

Versus

The Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No.C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400 051. ... Respondent

Mr. Deepak Dhane, Advocate with Mr. Shantibhushan Nirmal and Shama Khan, Advocates for the Appellant.

Mr. Abhiraj Arora, Advocate i/b. ELP for the Respondent.

CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member

Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala (Oral) 2

1.

The present appeal has been filed against the order of

debarment restraining the appellant from accessing the

securities market for a period of five years.

2. Initially on the basis of the preliminary investigation in

the trading and in dealing in the scrip, an ex-parte interim

order dated 20th February, 2015 was passed restraining the

appellant from accessing the securities market which was

order was confirmed on 25th August, 2016. Thereafter on the

basis of a show cause notice, the Whole Time Member of

SEBI considered the reply and, after considering the evidence

that was brought on record passed the impugned order

restraining the appellant from accessing the securities market

for a period of five years from the date of the ex-parte ad-

interim order dated 20th February, 2015. The appellant has

already undergone the debarment for more than four years

and eight months.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and

without going into the merit as to whether the appellant was

involved in the huge rise in the price of the scrip, we are of

the opinion that the present appeal can be disposed of in

terms of the debarment already undergone. 3

4. We also find that the present controversy is also

covered by the decision of this Tribunal dated

27th September, 2019 First Financial Services Ltd. & Anr. vs.

SEBI in Appeal no.273 of 2018.

5. Thus, without going into the merits of the case and

without considering the submissions of the counsel for the

parties on merits, we dispose of the appeal holding that the

restraint order restraining the appellants from buying, selling

or otherwise dealing in securities, directly or indirectly, or

being associated with the securities market in any manner,

whatsoever will come to an end from today.

6. It was stated by the learned counsel that, for the same

offence, adjudication proceedings have been initiated by the

Adjudicating Officer of SEBI and submitted that the findings

given in the impugned order of the WTM would be relied

upon by the AO. It was urged that the finding given in the

impugned order should not come in the way while

considering the matter on merits by the Adjudicating Officer

of SEBI.

7. We make it clear that the Adjudicating Officer of SEBI

will consider the matter on merits without being influenced

by the findings given by the WTM of SEBI. 4

8. In the light of the aforesaid, the appeal is disposed of.

In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their

own costs.

Sd/-

Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Dr. C. K. G. Nair Member

Sd/-

Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member

14.10.2019 Prepared and compared by RHN