JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.

1. Admit.

2. The appeal by the Securities and Exchange Board of India [“SEBI”] under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 [“SEBI Act”] arises from a judgment dated 1 November 2022 of the Securities Appellate Tribunal [“Tribunal”].

3. The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal by the respondent, set aside an order dated 22 March 2022 of the Whole Time Member [“WTM”] under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act by which a penalty of Rs Ten lakhs was imposed on the respondent for violating of Sections 68 and 77A of the Companies Act 1956 and Regulations 3(a), (b), (c), (d), 4(1), 4(2)(f), (k) and (r) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to the Securities Market) Regulations 2003 [“PFUTP Regulations”] read with Sections 12A (a), (b) and (c) of the SEBI Act.

4. The respondent was a Company Secretary of Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited [“DCHL”] for two years, 2009-10 and 2010-11.

5. On 3 August 2017, a notice to show cause was issued by the WTM of SEBI to DCHL, its Chairperson, Vice-chairperson and the respondent to show cause as to why an enquiry should not be he