LexSECURITIESAND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA(SEBI) & ANR. versus SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD. & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015] 7 S.C.R. 1025 SECURITIESAND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA(SEBI) A &ANR. v. SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD. & ORS. I.A. NOS. 59-61/2015 & I.A. NOS. 62-64/2015 INC P (C) Nos.412-413/2012 and CP (C) No.260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 JUNE 19, 2015 [T.5. THAKUR, ANIL R. DAVE AND A.K. SIKRI, JJ.) B c Contempt of Court - Sahara matters - Issuance of direction to Sahara Companies-Promoters and Director to D refund the amount collected by them for the Optional Fully Convertible Debentures - However, failure to deposit the same within the stipulated period- Contempt Petition by SEBI - Various opportunities given to contemnors to purge the contempt by depositing the amount, as directed - However, E non-compliance of the directions - Three out of four contemnors taken to judicial custody and direction issued to deposit sum of Rs. 33, 0001- crores - Subsequently, grant of bail to the contemnors, imposing condition on them to deposit Rs 10,000 crores-Rs.5,000 crores in cash and balance of F Rs. 5, 000 crores in the form of bank guarantee of a nationalised bank, to be furnished in favour of SEBI - However, non-compliance of the condition and three contemnors in jail for the last fifteen months - Various G directions given from time to time and /A's filed- Held: Total liability swelled to more than Rs.36, 000 crores - Said deposit of Rs. 10, 000 crores was only a condition of interim bail - It is the bounden duty of this Court to ensure that balance amount 1025 H ' 1026 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 7 S.C.R. A is also deposited by the applicants - Thus, it is, an unprecedented situation of personal liberty of three applicants on the one hand vis a vis majesty of law and ensuring larger public good, on the other hand - Therefore, orders passed may not be strictly construed as arising out of contempt B jurisdiction, but in exercise of inherent jurisdiction vested in this Court to do complete justice and to ensure that the applicants render full compliance of its orders - Bank guarantee format furnished by the contemnors accepted - Contemnors granted 18 months time to deposit the balance C amount from the date of their release from custody subject to the conditions stated therein - In the event of failure to do so, they would be taken into custody and committed to jail. Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of India & Ors. (2014) 8 D SCC 470 - referred to. E Case Law Reference (2014) a sec 470 Referred to. Para 15 CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: I. A. NOS. 59-61 OF 2015AND I.A. NOS. 62-64 OF 2015 IN F CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.412 &413 OF 2012 G H IN CIVILAPPEAL NOS. 9813 & 9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN (CIVILAPPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012) SEBI v. SAHARAINDIAREALESTATE CORPN. LTD. 1027 From the Judgment and Order dated 18.10.2011 of the A Securities Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 131 of 2011. Shekhar Naphade, Arvind Datar, Kapil Sibal, Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, S. Ganesh, Guru Krishna,Kumar, Shubhangi Tuli, Vikram Sobti, Pratap·Venugopal, Surekha Raman, Supriya B Jain, Gaurav Nair, Niharika (for K. J. John & Co.), Gautam Awasthi, Ayush Chaudhary, Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Nijam Pasha, Simranjeet Singh, Gautam Talukdar, Rahul Tripathi, R. S. YAdav, Gaurav Kejriwal, Ramesh Babu M. R., Swati Setia, D. L. Chidananda, Sadhana Sandhu, Anil Katiyar for the C appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. Before we advert to the reliefs claimed in these applications and announce" the outcome thereof, we D would like to recapitulate, very briefly, the genesis for moving these applications as we feel that such a recount of the previous events would make it easy to understand the circumstances under which these applications have been filed. It would also E provide us the course of action that is to be taken on the prayers made in these applications. 2. The main proceedings with which we are concerned are the contempt petitions bearing Nos. 412 of 2012 and 413 F of 2012 in Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 of 2011 and 9833 of 2011 as well as Contempt Petition No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012. These contempt petitions filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short, 'SEBI') have the origin in the judgments that were pronounced in the civil G appeals, numbers whereof are mentioned above. It so happened that Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited (SIRECL) and Sahara
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.