Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMRESH SHUKLA VS. INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA
$~181 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 19247/2025 YOGIETA SONDHI MEHRA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayyar, Sr. Adv., Ms.
Awantika Manohar, Ms. Parul Dhurvey. Mr. Manan Mehra and Mr.
Aman Kr. Pandey, Advs.
versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR.
.....Respondents Through: Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Sr. Adv., Mr.
Mahfooz Nazki, Mr. Ashish Prasad, Ms. Mukta Dutta and Mr. Hasnat Nazki, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
O R D E R
% 18.12.2025 CM APPL.80289/2025 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 19247/2025 and CM APPL.80288/2025
3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning summons dated 11.11.2025 and 01.12.2025 bearing Nos. SEBI/HO/ISD/ISD-SEC-2/P/OW/2025/ 28360/1 and SEBI/HO/ISD/ISD- SEC-2/P/OW/2025/ 30070/1, respectively, issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) under Sections 11C(3) and 11C(5) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter “SEBI Act”). 4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the said summons have been issued wholly without jurisdiction. He draws attention to Section 11C of the SEBI Act, 1992 whic
(1) Rectificatory jurisdiction under Section 59 of Companies Act, 2013 is summary in nature and not intended to be exercised where there are contested facts and disputed questions.
(2) Public admi....
The SEBI Adjudication process mandates a preliminary opinion for the appointment of an Adjudicating Officer, and failure to record this opinion can vitiate subsequent proceedings.
(1) Power of Supreme Court to enter regulatory domain of SEBI in framing delegated legislation is limited – Court cannot examine correctness, suitability, or appropriateness of policy, particularly w....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the presence of the petitioner in India was necessary for the completion of the investigation, considering his involvement in share manipulati....
Mere service of notice in a state does not confer High Court jurisdiction under Article 226 if the cause of action primarily arises elsewhere.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of minority shareholders to documents related to SEBI investigations and show cause notices, and the obligation of SEBI to comply w....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
