New Delhi (ILNS): The Supreme Court has received a petition from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), India’s stock market regulator, asking for directions to beleaguered Sahara India chief Subrata Roy to pay up Rs 62,600 in dues. SEBI has also requested the court to cancel Roy’s parole if this money (which includes 15 percent interest) is not paid immediately. This is a contempt petition, for Roy not adhering to the rulings of the top court.
SEBI has claimed that this is the amount outstanding from Roy’s two companies. It has been claimed that the liabilities have grown since the demands were made last eight years ago.
This claim is based on a 2012 Supreme Court order which decided that the Sahara Group had violated securities laws and had raised huge amount of money in cash illegally. Roy had been sent to jail for this act and is out on parole.
SEBI has also said that it has appointed a former judge of the Supreme Court, Justice (Retd) B.N. Agarwal “to oversee whether directions issued by this Court are properly and effectively complied with by the SEBI (WTM) from the date of this order.”
The SEBI plea talks about “three specific directions issued by this Hon’ble Court to be complied with by the Respondents as contained in paras 1,2 and 4.
Such directions are,-
a) Direction No. 1 : Saharas to make all refunds with interest at l5%to SEBI (only) within a period of three months; clearly indicating thereby that the respondents were not allowed to directly settle their liabilities with their investors or group of investors, after the passing of the judgment and order dated 31,08.12;
b) Direction Nos. 2 & 4 : the Respondents herein to furnish, to SEBI, within 10 days from the date of the Judgment and order dated 31.08. 12, the following :
i) the details with supporting documents to establish whether they had refirnded any amount to the persons who had subscribed through RHPs dated 13.3.2008 and 16.10.2009; and
ii) all documents in their custody, particularly, the application forms submitted by subscribers, the approval and allotment of bonds and all other documents, so as to enable SEBI to ascertain the genuineness of the subscribers as well as the amounts deposited.”
The petition also states that
“the Saharas had filed statements dated 14.06.2012 during the final hearing of the aforementioned two Appeals indicating that after taking into consideration the premature redemption on account of request of investors and the death of investors, the outstanding liability of SIRECL as on 30.04.2012 stood at Rs16,997 Crores (principal amount) and the outstanding of liability of SHICL as on 30.04.2012 stood at Rs 6,352 Crores (principal amount). It was the above amounts that were to have been deposited with SEBI in terms of direction 1 in the judgment and final order dated 31.08.2012.”
The petition goes on to say:
“Inspite of the aforesaid ‘clear directions giving clear timelines, the respondents, in utter disregard, disrespect and disobedience of the directions of this Hon’ble Court, deliberately and wilfully, did not comply with any of the aforesaid directions and thereby committed contempt of this Hon’ble Court.”