India's Congress party on Friday (September 6) accused SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving rental income from a company linked to Wockhardt Limited, a firm under investigation by SEBI for insider trading and other violations. According to Congress, this breaches SEBI’s 2008 conflict of interest guidelines for board members.

Pawan Khera, head of Congress’ media and publicity department, claimed&nbsp;that between 2018 and 2024, Buch received ₹2.16 crore ($257,220) in rental payments from Carol Info Services Limited, a company connected to Wockhardt Limited. Khera raised this issue during a press briefing at the AICC headquarters in New Delhi, pointing out that SEBI was investigating Wockhardt in 2023, including a case of insider trading.

“The SEBI chairperson was appointed on March 2, 2022, by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, which the Prime Minister heads. Was her appointment cleared on the condition that she could maintain her previous financial relationships, provided she acted in line with the wishes of the prime minister and his close associates?” the Congress leader asked.

Khera contrasted Buch’s actions with previous SEBI chairpersons, who, he said, took steps to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. “For instance, M. Damodaran sold his 50 SBI shares when he took over UTI in 2001, and CB Bhave recused himself from all matters involving the National Securities Depository Limited (NSDL), where he was formerly chairman. In contrast, Ms. Buch merely transferred her investments to her spouse, which raises concerns about credibility,” he&nbsp;said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/ujjain-one-held-for-raping-woman-on-busy-ujjain-road-bystanders-film-it-post-it-online-756432">One held for raping woman on busy road in India's Ujjain, bystanders film it</a>

Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh placed the blame squarely on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, asking why he had not taken action and whether more evidence of a lack of transparency and integrity in the capital markets regulator was needed. 
&nbsp; 
“By the NSE’s data, there are now 10 crore Indians with unique PANs who have some form of investment in this market. Don’t they deserve better? Why does he not move? What is he afraid of?” Ramesh said in a post on X.

Meanwhile, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament has announced plans to look into the functioning of regulatory bodies set up by Acts of Parliament, including SEBI. PAC Chairman K C Venugopal stated that the committee will decide whether to summon Buch to address these allegations.

Congress has also raised concerns over payments Buch allegedly received from her former employer, ICICI Bank, after joining SEBI, calling for a separate investigation into the matter.

(With inputs from agencies)

India's Congress party on Friday (September 6) accused SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving rental income from a company linked to Wockhardt Limited, a firm under investigation by SEBI for insider trading and other violations.

India's Congress party on Friday (September 6) accused SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving rental income from a company linked to Wockhardt Limited, a firm under investigation by SEBI for insider trading and other violations. According to Congress, this breaches SEBI’s 2008 conflict of interest guidelines for board members. Pawan Khera, head of Congress’ media and publicity department, claimed that between 2018 and 2024, Buch received ₹2.16 crore ($257,220) in rental payments from Carol Info Services Limited, a company connected to Wockhardt Limited. Khera raised this issue during a press briefing at the AICC headquarters in New Delhi, pointing out that SEBI was investigating Wockhardt in 2023, including a case of insider trading. “The SEBI chairperson was appointed on March 2, 2022, by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, which the Prime Minister heads. Was her appointment cleared on the condition that she could maintain her previous financial relationships, provided she acted in line with the wishes of the prime minister and his close associates?” the Congress leader asked. Khera contrasted Buch’s actions with previous SEBI chairpersons, who, he said, took steps to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. “For instance, M. Damodaran sold his 50 SBI shares when he took over UTI in 2001, and CB Bhave recused himself from all matters involving the National Securities Depository Limited (NSDL), where he was formerly chairman. In contrast, Ms. Buch merely transferred her investments to her spouse, which raises concerns about credibility,” he said. Also read: One held for raping woman on busy road in India's Ujjain, bystanders film it Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh placed the blame squarely on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, asking why he had not taken action and whether more evidence of a lack of transparency and integrity in the capital markets regulator was needed. “By the NSE’s data, there are now 10 crore Indians with unique PANs who have some form of investment in this market. Don’t they deserve better? Why does he not move? What is he afraid of?” Ramesh said in a post on X. Meanwhile, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament has announced plans to look into the functioning of regulatory bodies set up by Acts of Parliament, including SEBI. PAC Chairman K C Venugopal stated that the committee will decide whether to summon Buch to address these allegations. Congress has also raised concerns over payments Buch allegedly received from her former employer, ICICI Bank, after joining SEBI, calling for a separate investigation into the matter. (With inputs from agencies)

Congress hits SEBI chief with new conflict of interest charges over $257,220 rental payments

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is facing heightened scrutiny as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has decided to include a review of the regulator's performance in its agenda. This move comes in response to serious allegations made against Sebi's Chairperson, Madhabi Puri Buch, by the US-based firm Hindenburg Research. The committee, led by senior Congress leader K C Venugopal, is expected to summon Buch for questioning regarding these claims as detailed in a report by Indian Express.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>

Allegations of offshore investments<o:p></o:p>

The controversy erupted when Hindenburg Research alleged that both Madhabi Buch and her husband, Dhaval Buch, held stakes in obscure offshore entities linked to the Adani Group's alleged money siphoning scandal. The allegations have sparked a wave of political outrage, with opposition parties calling for a parliamentary probe into the matter. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has taken the unusual step of including a review of regulatory bodies established by Act of Parliament in its agenda, a move that has not been seen in recent years.<o:p></o:p>

In response to the allegations, the Buch's issued a joint statement clarifying that their investment in the fund mentioned in the Hindenburg report was made in 2015, prior to Madhabi's appointment as a Whole Time Member of Sebi in 2017 and her subsequent elevation to Chairperson in March 2022. They emphasised that all disclosures and recusal norms have been diligently followed as per Sebi's code of conduct.<o:p></o:p>

Calls for accountability<o:p></o:p>

The growing calls for accountability come as the Congress party held nationwide protests last month, demanding Buch's resignation from her position. The PAC, which is expected to meet several times this month, aims to address the pressing issues surrounding Sebi's governance and effectiveness in protecting investor interests.<o:p></o:p>

The committee's next meeting is scheduled for September 10, where it will discuss various subjects, including a performance audit of the National Rural Drinking Water Programme. However, the inclusion of Sebi's review reflects a significant shift in focus towards regulatory oversight, highlighting the importance of maintaining public trust in financial institutions.<o:p></o:p>

Sebi's role and future implications<o:p></o:p>

As the primary regulator of the securities market in India, Sebi plays a crucial role in ensuring transparency and safeguarding investor interests. The upcoming review by the&nbsp;Public Accounts Committee&nbsp;presents an opportunity for Sebi to address the concerns raised and reaffirm its commitment to effective regulation.<o:p></o:p>

The implications of this scrutiny are significant, not only for Sebi but also for the broader financial landscape in India. As the market continues to evolve, the need for a robust and responsive regulatory framework is paramount. The outcome of the committee's review will likely shape the future direction of Sebi and its ability to navigate the complexities of modern financial markets.<o:p></o:p>

Hence, the Public Accounts Committee's decision to review Sebi's performance amid serious allegations against its chairperson underscores the critical need for accountability and transparency in India's financial regulatory framework. As the situation unfolds, all eyes will be on the committee's findings and the potential impact on the regulator's operations and reputation.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is facing heightened scrutiny as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has decided to include a review of the regulator's performance in its agenda.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is facing heightened scrutiny as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has decided to include a review of the regulator's performance in its agenda. This move comes in response to serious allegations made against Sebi's Chairperson, Madhabi Puri Buch, by the US-based firm Hindenburg Research. The committee, led by senior Congress leader K C Venugopal, is expected to summon Buch for questioning regarding these claims as detailed in a report by Indian Express. Allegations of offshore investments The controversy erupted when Hindenburg Research alleged that both Madhabi Buch and her husband, Dhaval Buch, held stakes in obscure offshore entities linked to the Adani Group's alleged money siphoning scandal. The allegations have sparked a wave of political outrage, with opposition parties calling for a parliamentary probe into the matter. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has taken the unusual step of including a review of regulatory bodies established by Act of Parliament in its agenda, a move that has not been seen in recent years. In response to the allegations, the Buch's issued a joint statement clarifying that their investment in the fund mentioned in the Hindenburg report was made in 2015, prior to Madhabi's appointment as a Whole Time Member of Sebi in 2017 and her subsequent elevation to Chairperson in March 2022. They emphasised that all disclosures and recusal norms have been diligently followed as per Sebi's code of conduct. Calls for accountability The growing calls for accountability come as the Congress party held nationwide protests last month, demanding Buch's resignation from her position. The PAC, which is expected to meet several times this month, aims to address the pressing issues surrounding Sebi's governance and effectiveness in protecting investor interests. The committee's next meeting is scheduled for September 10, where it will discuss various subjects, including a performance audit of the National Rural Drinking Water Programme. However, the inclusion of Sebi's review reflects a significant shift in focus towards regulatory oversight, highlighting the importance of maintaining public trust in financial institutions. Sebi's role and future implications As the primary regulator of the securities market in India, Sebi plays a crucial role in ensuring transparency and safeguarding investor interests. The upcoming review by the Public Accounts Committee presents an opportunity for Sebi to address the concerns raised and reaffirm its commitment to effective regulation. The implications of this scrutiny are significant, not only for Sebi but also for the broader financial landscape in India. As the market continues to evolve, the need for a robust and responsive regulatory framework is paramount. The outcome of the committee's review will likely shape the future direction of Sebi and its ability to navigate the complexities of modern financial markets. Hence, the Public Accounts Committee's decision to review Sebi's performance amid serious allegations against its chairperson underscores the critical need for accountability and transparency in India's financial regulatory framework. As the situation unfolds, all eyes will be on the committee's findings and the potential impact on the regulator's operations and reputation.

Sebi under fire: Parliamentary committee to scrutinise regulator amid controversy

In the controversy over a letter by officials alleging toxic work culture at SEBI, reports quoting sources show the markets regulator has now initiated an enquiry into the leak of the letter dated August 6th. This comes after SEBI said its employee association did not send the letter to the government. Instead, the market regulator blamed external elements for the controversy.

SEBI initiates enquiry into letter alleging toxic work culture

A new Scandal is emerging amidst the ongoing dispute between Hindenburg and India's Market Regulators, this is based on media reports the intention of the country's second most valuable Bank to acquire its Securities unit has come under the scanner. SEBI is facing criticism over ICICI securities & ICICI bank merger. Watch in for more details!

A few shareholders of ICICI securities question SEBI's approval

Did SEBI Chief have a conflict of interest in ICICI dealings?

A section of SEBI employees has&nbsp;demanded that the market regulator delete a 'false and misleading' press release and also issue a public apology. The demand comes a day after SEBI issued the press release denying claims of an unprofessional work culture levelled by some employees.&nbsp;

"The achievements of SEBI are the result of collective efforts, not the work of a solitary leader. The leadership must take responsibility for the current state of affairs and work towards fostering a respectful and dignified work environment, rather than dismissing legitimate concerns with false and misleading statements," read the document dated September 5.&nbsp;

"Therefore, we demand that the leadership withdraw the false and misleading PR immediately and issue a public apology," it added.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sebi-chief-vs-hindenburg-hindenburg-links-sebi-chief-to-adani-report-749185" target="_blank">Watch |&nbsp;SEBI chief vs Hindenburg: Hindenburg links SEBI Chief to Adani report</a>

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sebi-chief-vs-hindenburg-hindenburg-links-sebi-chief-to-adani-report-749185/embed" width="560"></iframe>

<h2>What did the SEBI&nbsp;release claim?</h2>

Notably, a letter dated August 6 by the SEBI employees alleged that a toxic work culture was prevalent under the leadership of chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch.&nbsp;The issues, detailed in a letter titled 'Grievances of Sebi Officers-A Call for Respect,' highlighted several disturbing aspects of the work culture at SEBI.

In response, the market regulator denied the claims, citing high employee standards and condemning a few "external elements" behind employee protests.&nbsp;

“Junior officers have been receiving messages from external elements outside their group, effectively instigating them to go to the media, the (finance) ministry and the board, perhaps to serve their own purpose,” the five-page statement from SEBI read.&nbsp;

However, the SEBI employees said the PR was "misleading" as well as "riddled with factual inaccuracies".&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/congress-intensifies-attack-on-sebi-chief-for-receiving-more-retiral-benefit-than-salary-from-icici-bank-755562">Also read |&nbsp;Congress intensifies attack on SEBI chief for receiving more retiral benefit than salary from ICICI Bank</a>

SEBI has come under heavy scrutiny in recent weeks after US-based short seller, Hindenburg Research released a report, alleging that Buch had a conflict of interest while serving as the chief of the market regulator.&nbsp;

A SEBI board member last week revealed that Buch&nbsp;did not recuse herself from the investigation launched into the alleged stock manipulation carried out by the Adani Group.&nbsp;

The member, speaking on condition of anonymity to the publication, stated that Buch oversaw SEBI’s Adani probe “because it was ordered by the Supreme Court”.

If Buch did indeed oversee the investigation, it contradicts the position taken by the market regulator when it released a statement stating that Buch had “recused herself in matters involving potential conflicts of interest”.

(With inputs from agencies)

A section of SEBI employees has demanded that the market regulator delete a 'false and misleading' press release and also issue a public apology. The demand comes a day after SEBI issued the press release denying claims of an unprofessional work culture levelled by some employees.

A section of SEBI employees has demanded that the market regulator delete a 'false and misleading' press release and also issue a public apology. The demand comes a day after SEBI issued the press release denying claims of an unprofessional work culture levelled by some employees. "The achievements of SEBI are the result of collective efforts, not the work of a solitary leader. The leadership must take responsibility for the current state of affairs and work towards fostering a respectful and dignified work environment, rather than dismissing legitimate concerns with false and misleading statements," read the document dated September 5. "Therefore, we demand that the leadership withdraw the false and misleading PR immediately and issue a public apology," it added. Watch | SEBI chief vs Hindenburg: Hindenburg links SEBI Chief to Adani report What did the SEBI release claim? Notably, a letter dated August 6 by the SEBI employees alleged that a toxic work culture was prevalent under the leadership of chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. The issues, detailed in a letter titled 'Grievances of Sebi Officers-A Call for Respect,' highlighted several disturbing aspects of the work culture at SEBI. In response, the market regulator denied the claims, citing high employee standards and condemning a few "external elements" behind employee protests. “Junior officers have been receiving messages from external elements outside their group, effectively instigating them to go to the media, the (finance) ministry and the board, perhaps to serve their own purpose,” the five-page statement from SEBI read. However, the SEBI employees said the PR was "misleading" as well as "riddled with factual inaccuracies". Also read | Congress intensifies attack on SEBI chief for receiving more retiral benefit than salary from ICICI Bank SEBI has come under heavy scrutiny in recent weeks after US-based short seller, Hindenburg Research released a report, alleging that Buch had a conflict of interest while serving as the chief of the market regulator. A SEBI board member last week revealed that Buch did not recuse herself from the investigation launched into the alleged stock manipulation carried out by the Adani Group. The member, speaking on condition of anonymity to the publication, stated that Buch oversaw SEBI’s Adani probe “because it was ordered by the Supreme Court”. If Buch did indeed oversee the investigation, it contradicts the position taken by the market regulator when it released a statement stating that Buch had “recused herself in matters involving potential conflicts of interest”. (With inputs from agencies)

Agitated SEBI employees seek apology from regulator, removal of 'false and misleading' press release

The Indian National Congress (INC), the country's principal Opposition party, has levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. Congress said Buch was employed at&nbsp;Greater Pacific Capital (GPC) during her tenure at ICICI Bank between 2011 and 2013.

Congress said GPC is a private equity fund where Shaurya Doval, son of National Security Adviser (NSA), Ajit Doval, is part of the leadership team.&nbsp;

"Today, a news report says that Ms Buch did have two employments when she was at ICICI. She was also employed in a private equity fund called Greater Specific Capital," said&nbsp;Chairman of Professionals' Congress and Data Analytics, Praveen Chakravarty.&nbsp;

"Buch may have been recruited as a finance professional, but this raises a long list of allegations and questions. Doesn't it raise more concern?"

Chakravarty added that "many internal documents" on the matter had been shared by insiders.&nbsp;

"There are several more in the financial industry who want to volunteer information, documents, and other evidence anonymously. There is a whistleblower website for this purpose which collects documents 100 per cent securely and anonymously."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sebi-chief-vs-hindenburg-hindenburg-links-sebi-chief-to-adani-report-749185" target="_blank">Watch |&nbsp;SEBI chief vs Hindenburg: Hindenburg links SEBI Chief to Adani report</a>

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sebi-chief-vs-hindenburg-hindenburg-links-sebi-chief-to-adani-report-749185/embed" width="560"></iframe>

<h2>What did Congress previously claim?</h2>

The claim comes a couple of days after Congress said Buch received salary from ICICI Bank while serving as the SEBI chairperson, leading to a conflict of interest.&nbsp;

The party claimed that "between 2017-2021, as a whole time member of SEBI, the current SEBI chairperson received a salary from ICICI Bank amounting to Rs 12.63 crore ($1.5 million)".

Afterwards, ICICI Bank released a clarification stating it had paid no salary to Buch.&nbsp;

"ICICI Bank or its group companies have not paid any salary or granted any ESOPs to Ms Madhabi Puri Buch after her retirement, other than her retiral benefits," said the bank.

Also read |&nbsp;<a bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:8,&quot;y&quot;:244,&quot;w&quot;:696,&quot;h&quot;:34,&quot;abs_x&quot;:41,&quot;abs_y&quot;:1980}" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-buch-oversaw-adani-probe-despite-conflict-of-interest-claims-board-member-754803">SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch oversaw Adani probe despite conflict of interest, claims board member</a>&nbsp;

Not satisfied by the reply, Congress questioned how Buch's&nbsp;retiral benefits from her stint at the bank were more than the salary she drew.

"How can the retirement benefits be more than the salary she drew when she was with ICICI? Her average annual salary at ICICI was Rs 1.30 crore. However, her average pension and other retiral benefits turned out to be Rs 2.77 crore. How is it even possible?" questioned Congress leader Pawan Khera in a press conference.

The Indian market regulator chair has been under scrutiny ever since US-based short seller Hindenburg Research released a report earlier this month, alleging that Buch had a serious conflict of interest throughout the investigation process against Adani Group due to her investments abroad.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Indian National Congress (INC), the country's principal Opposition party, has levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. Congress said Buch was employed at Greater Pacific Capital (GPC) during her tenure at ICICI Bank between 2011 and 2013.

The Indian National Congress (INC), the country's principal Opposition party, has levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. Congress said Buch was employed at Greater Pacific Capital (GPC) during her tenure at ICICI Bank between 2011 and 2013. Congress said GPC is a private equity fund where Shaurya Doval, son of National Security Adviser (NSA), Ajit Doval, is part of the leadership team. "Today, a news report says that Ms Buch did have two employments when she was at ICICI. She was also employed in a private equity fund called Greater Specific Capital," said Chairman of Professionals' Congress and Data Analytics, Praveen Chakravarty. "Buch may have been recruited as a finance professional, but this raises a long list of allegations and questions. Doesn't it raise more concern?" Chakravarty added that "many internal documents" on the matter had been shared by insiders. "There are several more in the financial industry who want to volunteer information, documents, and other evidence anonymously. There is a whistleblower website for this purpose which collects documents 100 per cent securely and anonymously." Watch | SEBI chief vs Hindenburg: Hindenburg links SEBI Chief to Adani report What did Congress previously claim? The claim comes a couple of days after Congress said Buch received salary from ICICI Bank while serving as the SEBI chairperson, leading to a conflict of interest. The party claimed that "between 2017-2021, as a whole time member of SEBI, the current SEBI chairperson received a salary from ICICI Bank amounting to Rs 12.63 crore ($1.5 million)". Afterwards, ICICI Bank released a clarification stating it had paid no salary to Buch. "ICICI Bank or its group companies have not paid any salary or granted any ESOPs to Ms Madhabi Puri Buch after her retirement, other than her retiral benefits," said the bank. Also read | SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch oversaw Adani probe despite conflict of interest, claims board member Not satisfied by the reply, Congress questioned how Buch's retiral benefits from her stint at the bank were more than the salary she drew. "How can the retirement benefits be more than the salary she drew when she was with ICICI? Her average annual salary at ICICI was Rs 1.30 crore. However, her average pension and other retiral benefits turned out to be Rs 2.77 crore. How is it even possible?" questioned Congress leader Pawan Khera in a press conference. The Indian market regulator chair has been under scrutiny ever since US-based short seller Hindenburg Research released a report earlier this month, alleging that Buch had a serious conflict of interest throughout the investigation process against Adani Group due to her investments abroad. (With inputs from agencies)

SEBI chair Madhabi Puri Buch was employed at another firm during ICICI Bank tenure, Congress claims

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has initiated an enquiry into the leak of an anonymous letter dated August 6, which alleged a toxic work culture at the regulatory body according to a report by Moneycontrol.<o:p></o:p>

The decision to investigate the matter came after it was revealed that the SEBI employee associations did not send the letter to the government and, in fact, condemned the external sharing of the letter and its subsequent leak to the media, as it was an "internal issue.”<o:p></o:p>

Further, in a statement issued on September 4, SEBI expressed its belief that "junior officers have been receiving messages from external elements outside their group, effectively instigating them to go to media, go to the Ministry, go to Board, perhaps to serve their own purpose."<o:p></o:p>

The regulator clarified that the letter of August 6, 2024, was not sent by the SEBI employee associations to the government or the media. Instead, it was an anonymous email, and the officers and associations have themselves condemned it and communicated the same to the Human Resources Department (HRD) through emails.<o:p></o:p>

Excerpts from internal emails<o:p></o:p>

To corroborate its stance, SEBI included excerpts from emails sent internally by the SEBI Employee Association (SEA) and the SEBI Association of Legal Officers (SEALS). The SEA Council's email stated, "SEA firmly believes in dialogue and consultation with the management in line with the practice followed by SEBI in the last few years.

SEA forcefully condemns the leaking of internal information to media. It is reiterated that employee grievance is an internal issue which must remain within the organization. It has full faith in its members and the leadership of the organization that all internal issues could be solved amicably."<o:p></o:p>

Similarly, an email by the SEBI Association of Legal Officers stated, "We strongly condemn this and confirm that SEALS does not endorse such demeaning acts by a few unidentified set of staff members. We repose full faith in the organization and its leadership and will continue to do so."

Additionally, an email by officers of SEBI of Grade A/B/C stated, "We, officers of SEBI, condemn such email and any media leaks in strongest terms. We are of the firm view that internal grievances should remain within the organization."<o:p></o:p>

The email further stated, "It appears that someone is trying to further his/her personal agenda. We disassociate ourselves from any such attempts. As SEBI officers, we take pride in the reputation of our organization and are committed towards its betterment. We do not support any act that affects the integrity of this organization."<o:p></o:p>

SEBI's decision to launch an enquiry into the leaked letter and the subsequent response from the employee associations highlight the importance of maintaining a professional and harmonious work environment within the regulatory body.

As the investigation progresses, it will be crucial for SEBI to address any legitimate concerns raised by its employees while ensuring that the integrity and reputation of the organization remain intact. Investors and market participants are going to keep a close eye on the regulator and its next step to try to amicably resolve the internal issues swiftly.&nbsp;

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has initiated an enquiry into the leak of an anonymous letter dated August 6, which alleged a toxic work culture at the regulatory body according to a report by Moneycontrol.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has initiated an enquiry into the leak of an anonymous letter dated August 6, which alleged a toxic work culture at the regulatory body according to a report by Moneycontrol. The decision to investigate the matter came after it was revealed that the SEBI employee associations did not send the letter to the government and, in fact, condemned the external sharing of the letter and its subsequent leak to the media, as it was an "internal issue.” Further, in a statement issued on September 4, SEBI expressed its belief that "junior officers have been receiving messages from external elements outside their group, effectively instigating them to go to media, go to the Ministry, go to Board, perhaps to serve their own purpose." The regulator clarified that the letter of August 6, 2024, was not sent by the SEBI employee associations to the government or the media. Instead, it was an anonymous email, and the officers and associations have themselves condemned it and communicated the same to the Human Resources Department (HRD) through emails. Excerpts from internal emails To corroborate its stance, SEBI included excerpts from emails sent internally by the SEBI Employee Association (SEA) and the SEBI Association of Legal Officers (SEALS). The SEA Council's email stated, "SEA firmly believes in dialogue and consultation with the management in line with the practice followed by SEBI in the last few years. SEA forcefully condemns the leaking of internal information to media. It is reiterated that employee grievance is an internal issue which must remain within the organization. It has full faith in its members and the leadership of the organization that all internal issues could be solved amicably." Similarly, an email by the SEBI Association of Legal Officers stated, "We strongly condemn this and confirm that SEALS does not endorse such demeaning acts by a few unidentified set of staff members. We repose full faith in the organization and its leadership and will continue to do so." Additionally, an email by officers of SEBI of Grade A/B/C stated, "We, officers of SEBI, condemn such email and any media leaks in strongest terms. We are of the firm view that internal grievances should remain within the organization." The email further stated, "It appears that someone is trying to further his/her personal agenda. We disassociate ourselves from any such attempts. As SEBI officers, we take pride in the reputation of our organization and are committed towards its betterment. We do not support any act that affects the integrity of this organization." SEBI's decision to launch an enquiry into the leaked letter and the subsequent response from the employee associations highlight the importance of maintaining a professional and harmonious work environment within the regulatory body. As the investigation progresses, it will be crucial for SEBI to address any legitimate concerns raised by its employees while ensuring that the integrity and reputation of the organization remain intact. Investors and market participants are going to keep a close eye on the regulator and its next step to try to amicably resolve the internal issues swiftly.

SEBI investigates leaked letter alleging toxic work culture: Report

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is under intense scrutiny following its decision to approve the merger between ICICI Bank and its securities affiliate, ICICI Securities. The move, which has sparked a wave of criticism and legal challenges, has raised questions about the regulator’s impartiality and the application of its own rules as detailed by Andy Mukherjee in a recent opinion piece in Bloomberg. <o:p></o:p>

Why the controversial merger sparks investor backlash?<o:p></o:p>

The controversy centers around SEBI’s decision to allow the delisting of ICICI Securities without requiring the usual price discovery process, which is typically mandated to protect minority shareholders. ICICI Bank, which already owned nearly 75 per cent of ICICI Securities, offered a swap ratio of 67 shares of ICICI Bank for every 100 shares of the brokerage firm. This ratio was approved by SEBI despite the two companies operating in different lines of business a condition that would normally disqualify them from such an exemption.<o:p></o:p>

The exemption granted by SEBI has not sat well with many minority shareholders. Despite a majority vote in favor of the merger, concerns were raised when it was revealed that ICICI Securities had shared personal data of its minority investors with ICICI Bank, which then contacted them to influence the e-voting process. SEBI issued an administrative warning, acknowledging a "clear conflict of interest," but this did little to quell the unrest among investors.<o:p></o:p>

Class-action lawsuit and High Court intervention<o:p></o:p>

The controversy escalated when over 100 public, non-institutional investors, led by Bengaluru-based fund manager Manu Rishi Guptha, filed a class-action lawsuit. The plaintiffs argue that the skewed swap ratio undervalues ICICI Securities, causing them to lose over $200 million. Guptha and his fellow investors claim that ICICI Bank is unfairly capitalizing on ICICI Securities' significant cash reserves and short-term investments, valued at approximately Rs 116 billion ($1.4 billion).<o:p></o:p>

Despite ICICI Bank’s assertion that the terms of the merger were determined by independent valuation experts and endorsed by proxy advisory firms, the investors remain unconvinced. Their concerns have caught the attention of the Bombay High Court, which recently directed SEBI to share the approval letter that granted the merger exemption with the plaintiff's legal representative, though the contents remain confidential pending further court orders.<o:p></o:p>

Further, this case has broader implications for SEBI, particularly in light of the ongoing criticism the regulator faces in relation to its handling of the Adani Group investigation. Hindenburg Research, a New York-based short seller, has questioned SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch’s objectivity due to her past investments and consulting activities. Although Buch has recused herself from decisions involving ICICI Group, her previous role as CEO of ICICI Securities adds another layer of complexity to the situation.<o:p></o:p>

The fallout from the ICICI Bank and ICICI Securities merger raises critical questions about regulatory transparency and the consistency of SEBI’s rule enforcement. As the case progresses through India’s legal system, the outcome could set a significant precedent for how similar mergers are handled in the future.<o:p></o:p>

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is under intense scrutiny following its decision to approve the merger between ICICI Bank and its securities affiliate, ICICI Securities.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is under intense scrutiny following its decision to approve the merger between ICICI Bank and its securities affiliate, ICICI Securities. The move, which has sparked a wave of criticism and legal challenges, has raised questions about the regulator’s impartiality and the application of its own rules as detailed by Andy Mukherjee in a recent opinion piece in Bloomberg. Why the controversial merger sparks investor backlash? The controversy centers around SEBI’s decision to allow the delisting of ICICI Securities without requiring the usual price discovery process, which is typically mandated to protect minority shareholders. ICICI Bank, which already owned nearly 75 per cent of ICICI Securities, offered a swap ratio of 67 shares of ICICI Bank for every 100 shares of the brokerage firm. This ratio was approved by SEBI despite the two companies operating in different lines of business a condition that would normally disqualify them from such an exemption. The exemption granted by SEBI has not sat well with many minority shareholders. Despite a majority vote in favor of the merger, concerns were raised when it was revealed that ICICI Securities had shared personal data of its minority investors with ICICI Bank, which then contacted them to influence the e-voting process. SEBI issued an administrative warning, acknowledging a "clear conflict of interest," but this did little to quell the unrest among investors. Class-action lawsuit and High Court intervention The controversy escalated when over 100 public, non-institutional investors, led by Bengaluru-based fund manager Manu Rishi Guptha, filed a class-action lawsuit. The plaintiffs argue that the skewed swap ratio undervalues ICICI Securities, causing them to lose over $200 million. Guptha and his fellow investors claim that ICICI Bank is unfairly capitalizing on ICICI Securities' significant cash reserves and short-term investments, valued at approximately Rs 116 billion ($1.4 billion). Despite ICICI Bank’s assertion that the terms of the merger were determined by independent valuation experts and endorsed by proxy advisory firms, the investors remain unconvinced. Their concerns have caught the attention of the Bombay High Court, which recently directed SEBI to share the approval letter that granted the merger exemption with the plaintiff's legal representative, though the contents remain confidential pending further court orders. Further, this case has broader implications for SEBI, particularly in light of the ongoing criticism the regulator faces in relation to its handling of the Adani Group investigation. Hindenburg Research, a New York-based short seller, has questioned SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch’s objectivity due to her past investments and consulting activities. Although Buch has recused herself from decisions involving ICICI Group, her previous role as CEO of ICICI Securities adds another layer of complexity to the situation. The fallout from the ICICI Bank and ICICI Securities merger raises critical questions about regulatory transparency and the consistency of SEBI’s rule enforcement. As the case progresses through India’s legal system, the outcome could set a significant precedent for how similar mergers are handled in the future.

SEBI under fire for greenlighting ICICI Bank and ICICI securities merger

In a significant development, officials from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) have raised serious concerns about a "toxic" work culture prevailing under the leadership of Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. The allegations, which have been communicated to the finance ministry, paint a picture of a work environment marred by unprofessional conduct, mental health issues, and unrealistic expectations as detailed in a report by Economic Times. <o:p></o:p>

Unprofessional leadership and mental health impact<o:p></o:p>

The grievances, detailed in a letter titled 'Grievances of Sebi Officers-A Call for Respect,' highlight several disturbing aspects of the work culture at Sebi. According to the letter, which has been signed by approximately 500 officers of Grade A and above, the leadership steered by Buch has resorted to "shouting, scolding and public humiliation" as a norm in meetings. This behavior, coupled with the use of "harsh and unprofessional language," has created an oppressive atmosphere that has severely impacted the mental health of employees.<o:p></o:p>

The officials have expressed that the constant fear of being reprimanded has led to a situation where many employees, including those in higher grades, are reluctant to voice their concerns due to the "vindictive nature of people at the highest level." This fear has become the primary driving force within Sebi over the past two to three years, leading to a growing mistrust among employees.<o:p></o:p>

Unrealistic work targets and monitoring<o:p></o:p>

The letter also criticizes the management for imposing "unrealistic work targets with changing goalposts," which has resulted in significant stress and anxiety among employees. The officials argue that these targets are akin to treating employees as "robots with a knob that one can turn and increase the output," which is both unrealistic and detrimental to their well-being.<o:p></o:p>

Furthermore, the management has installed turnstile gates to monitor the intra-day attendance of employees, a move that has been met with resistance. The officials have demanded the removal of these gates, citing challenges for employees with visual impairments and the overall negative impact on work-life balance.<o:p></o:p>

Response from Sebi and ongoing issues<o:p></o:p>

In response to these allegations, Sebi has stated that the issues raised by the employees have been addressed. The regulator mentioned that changes have been made to the format of review meetings and that key result areas (KRAs) were drawn up after consultations with all departments. However, the officials remain skeptical, arguing that these measures do not adequately address the core grievances.<o:p></o:p>

Parallel allegations of conflict of interest and corruption<o:p></o:p>

These internal complaints come at a time when Buch is facing external allegations of conflict of interest and corruption. Zee group founder Subhash Chandra has accused Buch of being "corrupt" and has questioned her income, suggesting that it should be investigated by relevant agencies. Chandra's allegations include claims that Buch's income has significantly increased since she assumed her position at Sebi, which Buch and Sebi have vehemently denied.<o:p></o:p>

The Congress party has also raised questions about Buch's compensation from her former employer, ICICI Bank, after she took over as the Whole Time Member of Sebi in 2017. However, ICICI Bank has clarified that Buch has not received any salary or Employee stock options plan (ESOPs) from the bank other than her retiral benefits.<o:p></o:p>

The allegations of a toxic work culture at Sebi, coupled with external accusations against its chairperson, highlight a critical need for immediate attention and resolution. As the regulator continues to work on improving conditions for external stakeholders, it is imperative that it also addresses the growing mistrust and mental health concerns among its own employees. The situation demands a thorough investigation and meaningful reforms to restore a healthy and respectful work environment within Sebi.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

In a significant development, officials from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) have raised serious concerns about a "toxic" work culture prevailing under the leadership of Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch.

In a significant development, officials from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) have raised serious concerns about a "toxic" work culture prevailing under the leadership of Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. The allegations, which have been communicated to the finance ministry, paint a picture of a work environment marred by unprofessional conduct, mental health issues, and unrealistic expectations as detailed in a report by Economic Times. Unprofessional leadership and mental health impact The grievances, detailed in a letter titled 'Grievances of Sebi Officers-A Call for Respect,' highlight several disturbing aspects of the work culture at Sebi. According to the letter, which has been signed by approximately 500 officers of Grade A and above, the leadership steered by Buch has resorted to "shouting, scolding and public humiliation" as a norm in meetings. This behavior, coupled with the use of "harsh and unprofessional language," has created an oppressive atmosphere that has severely impacted the mental health of employees. The officials have expressed that the constant fear of being reprimanded has led to a situation where many employees, including those in higher grades, are reluctant to voice their concerns due to the "vindictive nature of people at the highest level." This fear has become the primary driving force within Sebi over the past two to three years, leading to a growing mistrust among employees. Unrealistic work targets and monitoring The letter also criticizes the management for imposing "unrealistic work targets with changing goalposts," which has resulted in significant stress and anxiety among employees. The officials argue that these targets are akin to treating employees as "robots with a knob that one can turn and increase the output," which is both unrealistic and detrimental to their well-being. Furthermore, the management has installed turnstile gates to monitor the intra-day attendance of employees, a move that has been met with resistance. The officials have demanded the removal of these gates, citing challenges for employees with visual impairments and the overall negative impact on work-life balance. Response from Sebi and ongoing issues In response to these allegations, Sebi has stated that the issues raised by the employees have been addressed. The regulator mentioned that changes have been made to the format of review meetings and that key result areas (KRAs) were drawn up after consultations with all departments. However, the officials remain skeptical, arguing that these measures do not adequately address the core grievances. Parallel allegations of conflict of interest and corruption These internal complaints come at a time when Buch is facing external allegations of conflict of interest and corruption. Zee group founder Subhash Chandra has accused Buch of being "corrupt" and has questioned her income, suggesting that it should be investigated by relevant agencies. Chandra's allegations include claims that Buch's income has significantly increased since she assumed her position at Sebi, which Buch and Sebi have vehemently denied. The Congress party has also raised questions about Buch's compensation from her former employer, ICICI Bank, after she took over as the Whole Time Member of Sebi in 2017. However, ICICI Bank has clarified that Buch has not received any salary or Employee stock options plan (ESOPs) from the bank other than her retiral benefits. The allegations of a toxic work culture at Sebi, coupled with external accusations against its chairperson, highlight a critical need for immediate attention and resolution. As the regulator continues to work on improving conditions for external stakeholders, it is imperative that it also addresses the growing mistrust and mental health concerns among its own employees. The situation demands a thorough investigation and meaningful reforms to restore a healthy and respectful work environment within Sebi.

SEBI officials complain to Finance Ministry of 'toxic' work culture: Report

With an aim to bolster foreign investment, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is re-evaluating its registration requirements for overseas investors interested in Indian government bonds. This initiative, announced by Ananth Narayan, a whole-time member of SEBI, during an industry conference in Mumbai, marks a crucial step in making the Indian bond market more accessible to foreign investors.<o:p></o:p>

Simplifying registration requirements<o:p></o:p>

SEBI is actively examining the possibility of waiving certain registration requirements for investors who are solely interested in investing in Indian government bonds. "We are actively examining if certain SEBI registration requirements can be done away with for those investors investing solely in Indian government bonds," Narayan told Bloomberg News.<o:p></o:p>

This move is part of SEBI's broader strategy to enhance the ease of doing business for foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) and to draw in high-quality overseas savings.<o:p></o:p>

Rising interest in Indian bonds<o:p></o:p>

The month of August saw a record high of $2.8 billion in net inflows into index-eligible bonds, the highest since JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co. included Indian bonds in its flagship emerging market gauge last year.<o:p></o:p>

This inclusion has increased India's weight in the index from 3 per cent to a projected 10 per cent by March 2025, significantly boosting interest from foreign investors.<o:p></o:p>

Analysts from Morgan Stanley attribute the increased net flows to Indian bonds to several factors, including the rising weight in the emerging market index, the conclusion of election-related uncertainties, and market expectations of a possible Fed rate cut in the upcoming month. These factors have collectively contributed to a more favorable investment climate for foreign investors.<o:p></o:p>

Enhanced support for foreign portfolio investors<o:p></o:p>

To further encourage foreign investment, SEBI is considering an easier application process for sovereign wealth funds and public retail funds that are typically exempt from additional disclosures when seeking registration in India. This move aims to reduce the bureaucratic hurdles faced by these investors, making it more appealing for them to invest in the Indian bond market.<o:p></o:p>

In addition, SEBI has established a dedicated cell to assist foreign portfolio investors. This cell has already reached out to over 500 investors and serves as a window to address any issues that may arise during the registration process. "Ensuring ease of doing investments for FPIs to draw in good quality overseas savings remains a top priority for us," Narayan emphasized.<o:p></o:p>

Further as India continues to emerge as a key player in the global financial landscape, these strategic adjustments by SEBI are poised to make the Indian bond market more attractive to foreign investors. By streamlining the registration process and providing dedicated support, SEBI is sending a clear message that it is committed to fostering a conducive environment for foreign investment.<o:p></o:p>

This initiative is part of a broader effort to integrate India more deeply into global financial markets. With the increasing weight of Indian bonds in emerging market indices and the ongoing simplification of regulatory processes, India is set to become an even more significant destination for foreign capital in the coming years.<o:p></o:p>

Hence, SEBI's decision to ease the registration process for foreign investors in Indian government bonds is a significant step forward in attracting more foreign investment. As the Indian economy continues to grow and integrate into global markets, these measures will play a crucial role in ensuring that the country remains an attractive and accessible destination for overseas investors.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

With an aim to bolster foreign investment, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is re-evaluating its registration requirements for overseas investors interested in Indian government bonds.

With an aim to bolster foreign investment, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is re-evaluating its registration requirements for overseas investors interested in Indian government bonds. This initiative, announced by Ananth Narayan, a whole-time member of SEBI, during an industry conference in Mumbai, marks a crucial step in making the Indian bond market more accessible to foreign investors. Simplifying registration requirements SEBI is actively examining the possibility of waiving certain registration requirements for investors who are solely interested in investing in Indian government bonds. "We are actively examining if certain SEBI registration requirements can be done away with for those investors investing solely in Indian government bonds," Narayan told Bloomberg News. This move is part of SEBI's broader strategy to enhance the ease of doing business for foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) and to draw in high-quality overseas savings. Rising interest in Indian bonds The month of August saw a record high of $2.8 billion in net inflows into index-eligible bonds, the highest since JPMorgan Chase & Co. included Indian bonds in its flagship emerging market gauge last year. This inclusion has increased India's weight in the index from 3 per cent to a projected 10 per cent by March 2025, significantly boosting interest from foreign investors. Analysts from Morgan Stanley attribute the increased net flows to Indian bonds to several factors, including the rising weight in the emerging market index, the conclusion of election-related uncertainties, and market expectations of a possible Fed rate cut in the upcoming month. These factors have collectively contributed to a more favorable investment climate for foreign investors. Enhanced support for foreign portfolio investors To further encourage foreign investment, SEBI is considering an easier application process for sovereign wealth funds and public retail funds that are typically exempt from additional disclosures when seeking registration in India. This move aims to reduce the bureaucratic hurdles faced by these investors, making it more appealing for them to invest in the Indian bond market. In addition, SEBI has established a dedicated cell to assist foreign portfolio investors. This cell has already reached out to over 500 investors and serves as a window to address any issues that may arise during the registration process. "Ensuring ease of doing investments for FPIs to draw in good quality overseas savings remains a top priority for us," Narayan emphasized. Further as India continues to emerge as a key player in the global financial landscape, these strategic adjustments by SEBI are poised to make the Indian bond market more attractive to foreign investors. By streamlining the registration process and providing dedicated support, SEBI is sending a clear message that it is committed to fostering a conducive environment for foreign investment. This initiative is part of a broader effort to integrate India more deeply into global financial markets. With the increasing weight of Indian bonds in emerging market indices and the ongoing simplification of regulatory processes, India is set to become an even more significant destination for foreign capital in the coming years. Hence, SEBI's decision to ease the registration process for foreign investors in Indian government bonds is a significant step forward in attracting more foreign investment. As the Indian economy continues to grow and integrate into global markets, these measures will play a crucial role in ensuring that the country remains an attractive and accessible destination for overseas investors.

SEBI set to streamline foreign investment in Indian government bonds

According to a recent study by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), a significant portion of Initial public offering (IPO) shares are being sold off rapidly after listing. The report, which examines investor behaviour from April 2021 to December 2023, reveals that 54 per cent of the Initial public offering shares allotted to investors (excluding anchor investors) were sold within a week of listing. 

The study highlights a pronounced "disposition effect," where investors are inclined to sell assets that have gained in value, while holding onto those that have lost value. Specifically, individual investors sold 50.2 per cent of their allotted shares within a week, non-institutional investors (NIIs) offloaded 63.3 per cent, and retail investors sold 42.7 per cent. Over a year, individual investors' selling rate soared to 70 per cent by value thus underlining the need for investor education and calmness as investors.

Mutual funds, in contrast, are more likely to hold onto initial public offerings shares for a longer duration. The study found that mutual funds sold only 3.3 per cent of their allotted shares within a week, whereas banks were far quicker, selling 79.8 percent within the same period. 

The report also noted that returns significantly influence selling behaviour. When IPO returns exceeded 20 per cent within the first week, individual investors sold 67.6 per cent of their shares by value. Conversely, when returns were negative, only 23.3 per cent of shares were sold. 

How has been the allotment of initial public offerings?

It is to be noted that retail investors from Gujarat were particularly active, receiving 39.3 per cent of the allotment, followed by Maharashtra with 13.5 per cent, and Rajasthan with 10.5 per cent respectively. The surge in IPO participation aligns with the growth in demat accounts, with nearly half of the accounts used for IPO applications between April 2021 and December 2023 having been opened post-COVID. This again underlines the importance of taking calm and informed decision in the financial markets. 

SEBI’s policy changes in April 2022 have led to notable shifts in the initial public offering landscape. Adjustments to the Non-institutional investor (NII) share allotment process and Reserve Bank of India's&nbsp;new guidelines on initial public offer (IPO) financing by non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) have contributed to a reduction in oversubscription rates.

The Non-institutional investor (NII) category’s oversubscription decreased from 38 times to 17 times, and applications from large NII investors (those applying for more than Rs 1 crore) fell dramatically from 626 per IPO to just 20. Additionally, the exit rate of big-ticket NII investors within a week dropped from 70 per cent to about 25 per cent in the post-policy period.

These findings highlight&nbsp;the evolving dynamics of the initial public offering&nbsp;market and investor behavior. The SEBI study offers crucial insights into how investor strategies are shifting and highlights the impact of recent regulatory changes on market practices.

What lessons can retail investors take from this study?<o:p></o:p>

It is crucial for retail investors to take this report by SEBI seriously. Retail investors should consider reading good books on investing and try to understand the concept of compounding. Patience plays a very important role in wealth building. Compounding is that simple concept of wealth creation which forms the basis of the investment thesis of prominent investors like Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger among others.

Therefore, retail investors should consider making investments in equity markets with a&nbsp; long-term horizon post understanding the business and the risks associated with the same. The focus hence should be on understanding the underlying business before going for the initial public offering. Wealth building therefore is a consequence of making calm and sensible investment decisions with a long-term vision.

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

According to a recent study by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), a significant portion of Initial public offering (IPO) shares are being sold off rapidly after listing.

According to a recent study by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), a significant portion of Initial public offering (IPO) shares are being sold off rapidly after listing. The report, which examines investor behaviour from April 2021 to December 2023, reveals that 54 per cent of the Initial public offering shares allotted to investors (excluding anchor investors) were sold within a week of listing. The study highlights a pronounced "disposition effect," where investors are inclined to sell assets that have gained in value, while holding onto those that have lost value. Specifically, individual investors sold 50.2 per cent of their allotted shares within a week, non-institutional investors (NIIs) offloaded 63.3 per cent, and retail investors sold 42.7 per cent. Over a year, individual investors' selling rate soared to 70 per cent by value thus underlining the need for investor education and calmness as investors. Mutual funds, in contrast, are more likely to hold onto initial public offerings shares for a longer duration. The study found that mutual funds sold only 3.3 per cent of their allotted shares within a week, whereas banks were far quicker, selling 79.8 percent within the same period. The report also noted that returns significantly influence selling behaviour. When IPO returns exceeded 20 per cent within the first week, individual investors sold 67.6 per cent of their shares by value. Conversely, when returns were negative, only 23.3 per cent of shares were sold. How has been the allotment of initial public offerings? It is to be noted that retail investors from Gujarat were particularly active, receiving 39.3 per cent of the allotment, followed by Maharashtra with 13.5 per cent, and Rajasthan with 10.5 per cent respectively. The surge in IPO participation aligns with the growth in demat accounts, with nearly half of the accounts used for IPO applications between April 2021 and December 2023 having been opened post-COVID. This again underlines the importance of taking calm and informed decision in the financial markets. SEBI’s policy changes in April 2022 have led to notable shifts in the initial public offering landscape. Adjustments to the Non-institutional investor (NII) share allotment process and Reserve Bank of India's new guidelines on initial public offer (IPO) financing by non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) have contributed to a reduction in oversubscription rates. The Non-institutional investor (NII) category’s oversubscription decreased from 38 times to 17 times, and applications from large NII investors (those applying for more than Rs 1 crore) fell dramatically from 626 per IPO to just 20. Additionally, the exit rate of big-ticket NII investors within a week dropped from 70 per cent to about 25 per cent in the post-policy period. These findings highlight the evolving dynamics of the initial public offering market and investor behavior. The SEBI study offers crucial insights into how investor strategies are shifting and highlights the impact of recent regulatory changes on market practices. What lessons can retail investors take from this study? It is crucial for retail investors to take this report by SEBI seriously. Retail investors should consider reading good books on investing and try to understand the concept of compounding. Patience plays a very important role in wealth building. Compounding is that simple concept of wealth creation which forms the basis of the investment thesis of prominent investors like Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger among others. Therefore, retail investors should consider making investments in equity markets with a long-term horizon post understanding the business and the risks associated with the same. The focus hence should be on understanding the underlying business before going for the initial public offering. Wealth building therefore is a consequence of making calm and sensible investment decisions with a long-term vision.

Investors quick to sell initial public offering shares, SEBI report reveals

The Congress on Monday accused SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving an income of Rs 16.80 crore between 2017 and 2024 after she became a whole-time member of the market regulator in 2017.

SEBI chief's income from ICICI under scrutiny

India's largest opposition party, the Indian National Congress (INC), on Monday (Sep 2) levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Buch and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The party called on PM Modi to clarify Buch's appointment as the head of the market regulator.&nbsp;

<h2 bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:8,&quot;y&quot;:100,&quot;w&quot;:723,&quot;h&quot;:26,&quot;abs_x&quot;:41,&quot;abs_y&quot;:1836}">Conflict of Interest</h2>

At a press conference, Congress accused Buch of receiving income from ICICI Bank while serving as SEBI chairperson, which they argue constitutes a serious conflict of interest.

The party claimed that "Between 2017-2021, as a whole time member of SEBI, the current SEBI chairperson received a salary from ICICI Bank amounting to Rs 12.63 crore ($1.5 million)".&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:8,&quot;y&quot;:244,&quot;w&quot;:696,&quot;h&quot;:34,&quot;abs_x&quot;:41,&quot;abs_y&quot;:1980}" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-buch-oversaw-adani-probe-despite-conflict-of-interest-claims-board-member-754803">SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch oversaw Adani probe despite conflict of interest, claims board member</a>

Congress general secretary in charge of communications, Jairam Ramesh, also alleged that in addition to this, she received income from ICICI Prudential amounting to Rs 22.41 lakh (around $27k), along with other incomes.&nbsp;

Congress alleged that Buch received INR 16,80,22,143 (over 2 million dollars) in total from ICICI. This, the party said, is around 5.09 times the income Madhabi Buch received from SEBI during the same period — INR 3,30,28,246 (over 393,000 dollars).

"The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is entrusted with safeguarding the hard-earned money of the Indian middle class, which painstakingly saves every penny that it can, to invest in the hope of a secure future. Yet, while the people place their hopes in SEBI, whose chairperson is appointed directly by the Prime Minister of India, they appear to have been conning us all along," alleged Congress' media and publicity department head Pawan Khera.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/why-is-sebis-credibility-at-all-time-low-after-hindenburg-report-751110">Madhuri Buch-Adani links: Why is SEBI’s credibility at an all-time low after latest Hindenburg report?</a>

<h2 bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:8,&quot;y&quot;:533,&quot;w&quot;:723,&quot;h&quot;:26,&quot;abs_x&quot;:41,&quot;abs_y&quot;:2269}">Did PM Modi know?</h2>

Congress leader Ramesh also questioned whether PM Modi was aware of Buch's benefits from ICICI.

"Was the Prime Minister aware that the current SEBI Chairperson as a whole-time member of SEBI was adjudicating complaints against ICICI and its affiliates while also receiving income from ICICI? Why did the current SEBI Chairperson continue to receive ESOP benefits from ICICI even though they had lapsed long ago?," he asked.

He further questioned that who was protecting the SEBI chairperson and why, and commented: "The non-biological PM cannot continue this indefinite stonewalling. Capital markets, in which crores of Indians make their investment, demand full transparency and integrity on the part of their regulator".

<h2 bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:8,&quot;y&quot;:695,&quot;w&quot;:723,&quot;h&quot;:52,&quot;abs_x&quot;:41,&quot;abs_y&quot;:2431}">ICICI's statement</h2>

Later in the day, ICICI released a statement clarifying it had paid no salary to Buch after her retirement.&nbsp;

"ICICI Bank or its group companies have not paid any salary or granted any ESOPs to Ms Madhabi Puri Buch after her retirement, other than her retiral benefits," said the bank.&nbsp;

"All the payments made to Ms Buch post her retirement had accrued to her during her employment phase with the ICICI Group. These payments comprise ESOPs and retiral benefits," the statement added.

(With inputs from agencies)

India's largest opposition party, the Indian National Congress (INC), on Monday (Sep 2) levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Buch and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

India's largest opposition party, the Indian National Congress (INC), on Monday (Sep 2) levelled fresh allegations against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Buch and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The party called on PM Modi to clarify Buch's appointment as the head of the market regulator. Conflict of Interest At a press conference, Congress accused Buch of receiving income from ICICI Bank while serving as SEBI chairperson, which they argue constitutes a serious conflict of interest. The party claimed that "Between 2017-2021, as a whole time member of SEBI, the current SEBI chairperson received a salary from ICICI Bank amounting to Rs 12.63 crore ($1.5 million)". Also read | SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch oversaw Adani probe despite conflict of interest, claims board member Congress general secretary in charge of communications, Jairam Ramesh, also alleged that in addition to this, she received income from ICICI Prudential amounting to Rs 22.41 lakh (around $27k), along with other incomes. Congress alleged that Buch received INR 16,80,22,143 (over 2 million dollars) in total from ICICI. This, the party said, is around 5.09 times the income Madhabi Buch received from SEBI during the same period — INR 3,30,28,246 (over 393,000 dollars). "The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is entrusted with safeguarding the hard-earned money of the Indian middle class, which painstakingly saves every penny that it can, to invest in the hope of a secure future. Yet, while the people place their hopes in SEBI, whose chairperson is appointed directly by the Prime Minister of India, they appear to have been conning us all along," alleged Congress' media and publicity department head Pawan Khera. Also read | Madhuri Buch-Adani links: Why is SEBI’s credibility at an all-time low after latest Hindenburg report? Did PM Modi know? Congress leader Ramesh also questioned whether PM Modi was aware of Buch's benefits from ICICI. "Was the Prime Minister aware that the current SEBI Chairperson as a whole-time member of SEBI was adjudicating complaints against ICICI and its affiliates while also receiving income from ICICI? Why did the current SEBI Chairperson continue to receive ESOP benefits from ICICI even though they had lapsed long ago?," he asked. He further questioned that who was protecting the SEBI chairperson and why, and commented: "The non-biological PM cannot continue this indefinite stonewalling. Capital markets, in which crores of Indians make their investment, demand full transparency and integrity on the part of their regulator". ICICI's statement Later in the day, ICICI released a statement clarifying it had paid no salary to Buch after her retirement. "ICICI Bank or its group companies have not paid any salary or granted any ESOPs to Ms Madhabi Puri Buch after her retirement, other than her retiral benefits," said the bank. "All the payments made to Ms Buch post her retirement had accrued to her during her employment phase with the ICICI Group. These payments comprise ESOPs and retiral benefits," the statement added. (With inputs from agencies)

India: Congress slams PM Modi, questions whether he was aware of SEBI chair Buch’s ‘conflict of interest’

In a press meeting on September 2, the Indian National Congress (INC) accused Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving a substantial salary from ICICI Bank while serving as a member of the regulatory body. The party has alleged a serious breach of ethics and accountability in public service.

During the conference, Indian National Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera claimed that Buch received Rs 16.8 crore from ICICI Bank between 2017 and 2024, which was 5.09 times more than her salary from SEBI during the same period, reportedly Rs 3.3 crore.

Khera questioned, "When she (SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch) between 2017 and 2024 was taking regular income of Rs 16 crore 80 lakhs from ICICI Bank. You are also a full-time SEBI member. Why were you taking a salary from ICICI?"

"This is a direct violation of Section 54 of SEBI. Therefore, if Madhabi Puri Buch has any shame, she should resign from her post," he said.

The Congress party has raised concerns about multiple investigations involving ICICI Bank that were concluded while Buch was allegedly drawing income from the private entities, including ICICI Prudential.

ICICI Bank-ICICI Securities merger and Hindenburg allegations<o:p></o:p>

The controversy surrounding Buch's alleged conflict of interest has also been fueled by SEBI's involvement in the merger between ICICI Bank Ltd and its subsidiary, ICICI Securities.

Further, the US-based short seller Hindenburg Research has recently accused Buch and her husband of making investments in obscure offshore funds, which it claimed were used in the "Adani money siphoning scandal." Hindenburg also alleged that SEBI may have circumvented its investigation into the Adani Group due to Buch's alleged conflict of interest.

Buch has dismissed the accusations as "character assassination" and emphasized that she has made all necessary disclosures and recusals to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.

Indian National Congress demands investigation through a Joint Parliamentary Committee<o:p></o:p>

The Congress party has been vocal in its criticism of the alleged ties between the Adani Group and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Khera has been outspoken on the matter, posting his concerns on social media and demanding a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) investigation. The Opposition party's demand for a JPC investigation has gained momentum, setting the stage for further political confrontation.

What is the Adani-Hindenburg-SEBI saga?<o:p></o:p>

The Adani-Hindenburg-SEBI saga has unfolded as a complex web of allegations and investigations, beginning with a scathing report from Hindenburg Research in January 2023. The report accused the Adani Group, led by Gautam Adani, of extensive stock manipulation and accounting fraud, claiming that the conglomerate had inflated its valuations through improper means.

This led to a dramatic sell-off of Adani stocks, resulting in a loss of over $150 billion in market value. In response to the allegations, the Supreme Court of India established a six-member expert committee to investigate potential regulatory failures by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in handling the situation. SEBI was tasked with examining whether the Adani Group violated public shareholding norms and engaged in undisclosed transactions.

As investigations progressed, Hindenburg released additional allegations in August 2024, claiming that SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and her husband, Dhaval Buch, had stakes in offshore funds linked to the alleged money siphoning scandal involving the Adani Group. Hindenburg suggested that Buch's potential conflict of interest may have influenced SEBI's investigation, leading to accusations of bias.

Buch and SEBI have categorically denied these allegations, with Buch describing them as "character assassination." She asserted that she had made all necessary disclosures to avoid conflicts of interest. However, the controversy intensified when it was revealed that Buch had received income from consultancy firms while serving as SEBI chair, raising further questions about her impartiality.

In June 2024, SEBI issued a show-cause notice to Hindenburg Research regarding its short-selling activities related to Adani stocks, prompting Hindenburg to claim that the notice was an attempt to intimidate those exposing corruption. Hindenburg maintained that its research was based on thorough due diligence and publicly available information.

The political fallout from this saga has been significant, with the Indian National Congress demanding a Joint Parliamentary Committee investigation into the matter. The opposition party has accused the government of failing to ensure accountability and transparency within regulatory institutions. As the investigations continue, the Adani-Hindenburg saga remains a focal point of scrutiny, with implications for corporate governance and regulatory oversight in India.

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

In a press meeting on September 2, the Indian National Congress (INC) accused Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving a substantial salary from ICICI Bank while serving as a member of the regulatory body.

In a press meeting on September 2, the Indian National Congress (INC) accused Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch of receiving a substantial salary from ICICI Bank while serving as a member of the regulatory body. The party has alleged a serious breach of ethics and accountability in public service. During the conference, Indian National Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera claimed that Buch received Rs 16.8 crore from ICICI Bank between 2017 and 2024, which was 5.09 times more than her salary from SEBI during the same period, reportedly Rs 3.3 crore. Khera questioned, "When she (SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch) between 2017 and 2024 was taking regular income of Rs 16 crore 80 lakhs from ICICI Bank. You are also a full-time SEBI member. Why were you taking a salary from ICICI?" "This is a direct violation of Section 54 of SEBI. Therefore, if Madhabi Puri Buch has any shame, she should resign from her post," he said. The Congress party has raised concerns about multiple investigations involving ICICI Bank that were concluded while Buch was allegedly drawing income from the private entities, including ICICI Prudential. ICICI Bank-ICICI Securities merger and Hindenburg allegations The controversy surrounding Buch's alleged conflict of interest has also been fueled by SEBI's involvement in the merger between ICICI Bank Ltd and its subsidiary, ICICI Securities. Further, the US-based short seller Hindenburg Research has recently accused Buch and her husband of making investments in obscure offshore funds, which it claimed were used in the "Adani money siphoning scandal." Hindenburg also alleged that SEBI may have circumvented its investigation into the Adani Group due to Buch's alleged conflict of interest. Buch has dismissed the accusations as "character assassination" and emphasized that she has made all necessary disclosures and recusals to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. Indian National Congress demands investigation through a Joint Parliamentary Committee The Congress party has been vocal in its criticism of the alleged ties between the Adani Group and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Khera has been outspoken on the matter, posting his concerns on social media and demanding a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) investigation. The Opposition party's demand for a JPC investigation has gained momentum, setting the stage for further political confrontation. What is the Adani-Hindenburg-SEBI saga? The Adani-Hindenburg-SEBI saga has unfolded as a complex web of allegations and investigations, beginning with a scathing report from Hindenburg Research in January 2023. The report accused the Adani Group, led by Gautam Adani, of extensive stock manipulation and accounting fraud, claiming that the conglomerate had inflated its valuations through improper means. This led to a dramatic sell-off of Adani stocks, resulting in a loss of over $150 billion in market value. In response to the allegations, the Supreme Court of India established a six-member expert committee to investigate potential regulatory failures by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in handling the situation. SEBI was tasked with examining whether the Adani Group violated public shareholding norms and engaged in undisclosed transactions. As investigations progressed, Hindenburg released additional allegations in August 2024, claiming that SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and her husband, Dhaval Buch, had stakes in offshore funds linked to the alleged money siphoning scandal involving the Adani Group. Hindenburg suggested that Buch's potential conflict of interest may have influenced SEBI's investigation, leading to accusations of bias. Buch and SEBI have categorically denied these allegations, with Buch describing them as "character assassination." She asserted that she had made all necessary disclosures to avoid conflicts of interest. However, the controversy intensified when it was revealed that Buch had received income from consultancy firms while serving as SEBI chair, raising further questions about her impartiality. In June 2024, SEBI issued a show-cause notice to Hindenburg Research regarding its short-selling activities related to Adani stocks, prompting Hindenburg to claim that the notice was an attempt to intimidate those exposing corruption. Hindenburg maintained that its research was based on thorough due diligence and publicly available information. The political fallout from this saga has been significant, with the Indian National Congress demanding a Joint Parliamentary Committee investigation into the matter. The opposition party has accused the government of failing to ensure accountability and transparency within regulatory institutions. As the investigations continue, the Adani-Hindenburg saga remains a focal point of scrutiny, with implications for corporate governance and regulatory oversight in India.

SEBI Chair under fire from Congress for Conflict of Interest, linked to Rs 16.8 crore ICICI Bank Payments

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has taken significant action by cancelling the registrations of 39 stock brokers, seven commodity brokers, and 22 depository participants. This decision, announced on 30 August 2024, results from these entities failing to meet essential compliance requirements, thereby posing a potential risk to investors, as detailed in a PTI report.

SEBI's primary aim in revoking these registrations is to prevent any misuse of their status, particularly as these brokers are no longer active members of recognised stock exchanges or affiliated with depositories. The regulator stated, "This move aims to protect unsuspecting investors," emphasising the importance of maintaining a secure trading environment.

Despite the cancellations, the affected entities remain accountable for their past actions and must settle any outstanding dues to SEBI. They are also required to preserve records, address investor grievances, and ensure the continuity of services to their clients. SEBI noted that these brokers were initially granted registration under the condition that they would maintain membership in a recognised stock exchange, a requirement they no longer fulfil.

Among the stock brokers whose registrations have been cancelled are Bezel Stock Brokers, Reflection Investments, and Quantum Global Securities. The list also includes other firms such as Aanya Commodities and Destiny Securities. The seven commodity brokers affected include Wealth Mantra Commodities and Sumpoorna Comtrade.

In addition to the brokers, SEBI has also cancelled the registrations of 22 depository participants, which are entities that facilitate the holding and transfer of securities in electronic form. These participants were found to have terminated their agreements with depositories, thus failing to meet the criteria set out under the Depository Participants Regulations of 2018.

Who is a stock broker?<o:p></o:p>

A stockbroker, also known as a broker, is a financial market representative who operates in securities. Their primary job role involves obtaining purchase and sale orders and executing the same. Market participants or investors rely on their expertise and knowledge regarding market dynamics to invest in stocks and other investment options.

What are the functions of stock brokers?<o:p></o:p>

Stockbrokers offer a range of essential services to their clients, including providing informed advice on buying and selling stocks and other securities based on thorough market research. They handle transactions and related paperwork, maintain detailed records of all activities, and manage clients' investment portfolios with regular updates and responses to inquiries. Additionally, they keep clients informed about new investment opportunities and assist in adjusting investment strategies in response to changing market conditions.

Caution for Investors<o:p></o:p>

Vijay Kedia, Founder and Managing Director at Kedia Capital Services, has cautioned investors who may have a Demat account with any of the banned brokers, urging them to proceed with caution. He stated, "SEBI has banned these 39 stock brokers. If you have a Demat account with any of these, be cautious!"

The list of cancelled registrations includes:-<o:p></o:p>

1. Bezel Stock Brokers Private Limited

2. Reflection Investments

3. Action Financial Services (India) Ltd

4. Sumpoorna Portfolio Limited

5. Vineet Securities Pvt Ltd

6. Quantum Global Securities Limited

7. Wellindia Securities Limited

8. Vrise Securities Private Limited

9. Credential Stock Brokers Ltd

10. Aanya Commodities Pvt Ltd

11. Amber Solutions Pvt Ltd

12. Arcadia Share &amp; Stock Brokers Private Limited

13. C.M. Goenka Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd

14. Destiny Securities Ltd

15. Bhavesh Dhirajlal Stock Broking Co Ltd

16. Enrich Fin &amp; Securities Ltd

17. First Futures and Stocks Private Limited

18. Ganga Yamuna Finvest Private Limited

19. Gems Equities &amp; Securities Pvt Ltd

20. Indovision Securities Limited

21. Olympia Securities Limited (Investnet Securities India Ltd)

22. Century Consultants Ltd

23. Merfin (India) Ltd

24. Micro Forex Equity &amp; Derivatives Private Limited

25. Moneyflo Securities Private Limited

26. Mousumi Deb Roy (Goodluck Securities)

27. Orient Capital Markets Pvt Ltd

28. Orion Capital and Debt Market

29. Parikh &amp; Shah Finvest Pvt Ltd

30. Prem Somani Share Brokers Pvt Ltd

31. Prime Broking Company (I) Limited

32. Rusoday Securities Ltd

33. Saarc Net Limited

34. Star Share &amp; Stock Brokers Ltd

35. Unicon Securities Pvt Ltd (Unickon Securities Pvt Ltd)

36. Wealth Mantra Limited

37. Yuvraj Securities

38. Classic Share &amp; Stock Broking Services Ltd

39. Grovalue Securities Private Limited

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p> 
The cancellation of registrations is part of SEBI's ongoing efforts to uphold the integrity of the capital markets and ensure that only compliant entities operate within this space. The regulator has emphasised that all parties involved must take necessary actions regarding any defaults or pending matters, ensuring that investor interests remain protected.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has taken significant action by cancelling the registrations of 39 stock brokers, seven commodity brokers, and 22 depository participants.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has taken significant action by cancelling the registrations of 39 stock brokers, seven commodity brokers, and 22 depository participants. This decision, announced on 30 August 2024, results from these entities failing to meet essential compliance requirements, thereby posing a potential risk to investors, as detailed in a PTI report. SEBI's primary aim in revoking these registrations is to prevent any misuse of their status, particularly as these brokers are no longer active members of recognised stock exchanges or affiliated with depositories. The regulator stated, "This move aims to protect unsuspecting investors," emphasising the importance of maintaining a secure trading environment. Despite the cancellations, the affected entities remain accountable for their past actions and must settle any outstanding dues to SEBI. They are also required to preserve records, address investor grievances, and ensure the continuity of services to their clients. SEBI noted that these brokers were initially granted registration under the condition that they would maintain membership in a recognised stock exchange, a requirement they no longer fulfil. Among the stock brokers whose registrations have been cancelled are Bezel Stock Brokers, Reflection Investments, and Quantum Global Securities. The list also includes other firms such as Aanya Commodities and Destiny Securities. The seven commodity brokers affected include Wealth Mantra Commodities and Sumpoorna Comtrade. In addition to the brokers, SEBI has also cancelled the registrations of 22 depository participants, which are entities that facilitate the holding and transfer of securities in electronic form. These participants were found to have terminated their agreements with depositories, thus failing to meet the criteria set out under the Depository Participants Regulations of 2018. Who is a stock broker? A stockbroker, also known as a broker, is a financial market representative who operates in securities. Their primary job role involves obtaining purchase and sale orders and executing the same. Market participants or investors rely on their expertise and knowledge regarding market dynamics to invest in stocks and other investment options. What are the functions of stock brokers? Stockbrokers offer a range of essential services to their clients, including providing informed advice on buying and selling stocks and other securities based on thorough market research. They handle transactions and related paperwork, maintain detailed records of all activities, and manage clients' investment portfolios with regular updates and responses to inquiries. Additionally, they keep clients informed about new investment opportunities and assist in adjusting investment strategies in response to changing market conditions. Caution for Investors Vijay Kedia, Founder and Managing Director at Kedia Capital Services, has cautioned investors who may have a Demat account with any of the banned brokers, urging them to proceed with caution. He stated, "SEBI has banned these 39 stock brokers. If you have a Demat account with any of these, be cautious!" The list of cancelled registrations includes:- 1. Bezel Stock Brokers Private Limited 2. Reflection Investments 3. Action Financial Services (India) Ltd 4. Sumpoorna Portfolio Limited 5. Vineet Securities Pvt Ltd 6. Quantum Global Securities Limited 7. Wellindia Securities Limited 8. Vrise Securities Private Limited 9. Credential Stock Brokers Ltd 10. Aanya Commodities Pvt Ltd 11. Amber Solutions Pvt Ltd 12. Arcadia Share & Stock Brokers Private Limited 13. C.M. Goenka Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd 14. Destiny Securities Ltd 15. Bhavesh Dhirajlal Stock Broking Co Ltd 16. Enrich Fin & Securities Ltd 17. First Futures and Stocks Private Limited 18. Ganga Yamuna Finvest Private Limited 19. Gems Equities & Securities Pvt Ltd 20. Indovision Securities Limited 21. Olympia Securities Limited (Investnet Securities India Ltd) 22. Century Consultants Ltd 23. Merfin (India) Ltd 24. Micro Forex Equity & Derivatives Private Limited 25. Moneyflo Securities Private Limited 26. Mousumi Deb Roy (Goodluck Securities) 27. Orient Capital Markets Pvt Ltd 28. Orion Capital and Debt Market 29. Parikh & Shah Finvest Pvt Ltd 30. Prem Somani Share Brokers Pvt Ltd 31. Prime Broking Company (I) Limited 32. Rusoday Securities Ltd 33. Saarc Net Limited 34. Star Share & Stock Brokers Ltd 35. Unicon Securities Pvt Ltd (Unickon Securities Pvt Ltd) 36. Wealth Mantra Limited 37. Yuvraj Securities 38. Classic Share & Stock Broking Services Ltd 39. Grovalue Securities Private Limited The cancellation of registrations is part of SEBI's ongoing efforts to uphold the integrity of the capital markets and ensure that only compliant entities operate within this space. The regulator has emphasised that all parties involved must take necessary actions regarding any defaults or pending matters, ensuring that investor interests remain protected.

SEBI cancels registration of 39 stock brokers, 7 commodity brokers

In her first public appearance since Hindenburg's scathing attack, SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch presented the regulator's plan at an event on Thursday. This comes when calls for an independent probe into US Short seller's allegations against the SEBI chief are growing. However, Buch did not address Hindenburg's allegations.

SEBI Chief's first public appearance since Hindenburg report

Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch on Thursday (August 29), said that Sebi has started working on a standard Application Programming Interface (API) for exchanges and depositories.&nbsp;

The Sebi chief was speaking at the Global Fintech Fest in Mumbai, where she emphasised that the regulatory body has been working on a standard application programming interface (API), adding that the&nbsp;technology will also be used by performance validation agencies.&nbsp;

However, when asked about the latest set of allegations alleged by the&nbsp;Hindenburg,&nbsp;she refused to take questions.&nbsp;

<h2>Hindenburg's direct attack on Sebi's chief&nbsp;</h2>

Earlier this month, US-based short-seller Hindenburg accused Sebi chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and the regulatory body, alleging that Buch and her husband had previously held investments in offshore funds, also used by the Adani group.&nbsp;

Moreover, the Hindenburg report further stated that Sebi has shown a lack of interest in proving the Adani group's alleged undisclosed network of shell entities. They further connected the alleged links of Buch's family with the Adani group for the delay in the investigation.&nbsp;

However, the Sebi chief and her husband have denied the charges.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/why-sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-buchs-ties-with-blackstone-warrant-an-investigation-752404">Also read:&nbsp;Why SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch’s ties with Blackstone warrant an investigation</a>

<h2>Application Programming Interface</h2>

Further talking about API, Sebi chief said that the regulator has been concentrating on ensuring that all the market institution infrastructure (MIIs) have been adopting APIs 100 per cent.&nbsp;

She said, "The process of file upload and file download has many limitations and is also vulnerable to errors. If everything is API-enabled then the fintech industry leverages the entire market ecosystem."

Watch:&nbsp;Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief: Credibility crisis staring at SEBI Chief?

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/hindenburg-vs-sebi-chief-credibility-crisis-staring-at-sebi-chief-753906/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Sebi chairperson emphasised that if a fintech company has reached a certain level of maturity, it wants to go for IPO and Sebi should not waste time in giving approvals.&nbsp;

She added that today, most of the pending IPOs are in the realm of judicial intervention or where the regulatory approval is pending from another regulator.&nbsp;

Buch further mentioned that Sebi is working on more than a dozen Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered technologies, with an aim to improve surveillance and processing using AI.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch on Thursday (August 29), said that Sebi has started working on a standard Application Programming Interface (API) for exchanges and depositories.

Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch on Thursday (August 29), said that Sebi has started working on a standard Application Programming Interface (API) for exchanges and depositories. The Sebi chief was speaking at the Global Fintech Fest in Mumbai, where she emphasised that the regulatory body has been working on a standard application programming interface (API), adding that the technology will also be used by performance validation agencies. However, when asked about the latest set of allegations alleged by the Hindenburg, she refused to take questions. Hindenburg's direct attack on Sebi's chief Earlier this month, US-based short-seller Hindenburg accused Sebi chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and the regulatory body, alleging that Buch and her husband had previously held investments in offshore funds, also used by the Adani group. Moreover, the Hindenburg report further stated that Sebi has shown a lack of interest in proving the Adani group's alleged undisclosed network of shell entities. They further connected the alleged links of Buch's family with the Adani group for the delay in the investigation. However, the Sebi chief and her husband have denied the charges. Also read: Why SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch’s ties with Blackstone warrant an investigation Application Programming Interface Further talking about API, Sebi chief said that the regulator has been concentrating on ensuring that all the market institution infrastructure (MIIs) have been adopting APIs 100 per cent. She said, "The process of file upload and file download has many limitations and is also vulnerable to errors. If everything is API-enabled then the fintech industry leverages the entire market ecosystem." Watch: Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief: Credibility crisis staring at SEBI Chief? × The Sebi chairperson emphasised that if a fintech company has reached a certain level of maturity, it wants to go for IPO and Sebi should not waste time in giving approvals. She added that today, most of the pending IPOs are in the realm of judicial intervention or where the regulatory approval is pending from another regulator. Buch further mentioned that Sebi is working on more than a dozen Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered technologies, with an aim to improve surveillance and processing using AI. (With inputs from agencies)

Global Fintech Fest: SEBI chief refuses to take questions on Hindenburg report

The ongoing Hindenburg controversy casts a shadow over SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch's credibility. Particularly the accusation of conflicts of interest while holding the post of the head of SEBI. However, former SEBI Chief, M. Damodaran, in a media television interview, referring to Buch and the regulator's response to the allegations, said, "On the basis of the information I have, I have no major problem." however, with the clamour for an independent probe growing, Tushar Kumar, an advocate of the Supreme Court of India, from a legal viewpoint, suggested that "She should provide detailed documentation of her financial dealings and investments to establish their legitimacy and dissociate them from her role at SEBI." Kumar noted, "Additionally, Buch should engage legal counsel to address any potential conflicts of interest and to navigate the allegations effectively." he added: "SEBI must conduct an independent review of the claims to maintain the regulator's credibility and uphold market integrity."

Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief: Credibility crisis staring at SEBI Chief?

Markets regulator Sebi has barred industrialist Anil Ambani, 24 other entities, including former key officials of Reliance Home Finance from the securities market for five years for diversion of funds from the company.

Sebi has imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore on Ambani and restrained him from being associated with the securities market including as a director or Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) in any listed company, or any intermediary registered with the market regulator, for a period of 5 years.

Also, the regulator barred Reliance Home Finance from the securities market for six months and slapped a fine of Rs 6 lakh on it.

In its 222-page final order, Sebi found that Anil Ambani, with the help of RHFL's key managerial personnel, had orchestrated a fraudulent scheme to siphon-off funds from RHFL by disguising them as loans to entities linked to him.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lifestyle/news-chatgpt-and-vogue-publisher-cond%C3%A9-nast-join-hands-for-searchgpt-partnership-what-does-it-mean-751871">ChatGPT and Vogue publisher Condé Nast join hands for SearchGPT partnership. What does it mean?</a>

Although the Board of Directors of RHFL had issued strong directives to stop such lending practices and reviewed corporate loans regularly, the company's management ignored these orders.

This suggests a significant failure of governance, driven by certain key managerial personnel under the influence of Anil Ambani.

Given these circumstances, the company RHFL itself should not be held equally responsible as the individuals involved in the fraud.

Further, the remaining entities have played the role of being either recipients of illegally obtained loans or conduits to enable illegal diversion of monies from RHFL, the regulator noted.

Sebi said its findings have established the "existence of a fraudulent scheme, orchestrated by Noticee No. 2 (Anil Ambani) and administered by the KMPs of RHFL, to siphon off funds from the public listed company (RHFL) by structuring them as 'loans' to credit unworthy conduit borrowers, and in turn, to onward borrowers, all of whom have been found to be 'promoter linked entities' i.e. entities associated/ linked with Noticee 2 (Anil Ambani)".

Ambani used his position as 'chairperson of the ADA group' and his significant indirect shareholding in the holding company of RHFL to orchestrate the fraud.

Sebi, in its order on Thursday, noted the cavalier approach of the company's management and promoter in approving loans worth hundreds of crores to companies that had little to no assets, cash flow, net worth, or revenue.

This suggests a sinister objective behind the 'loans'. The situation becomes even more suspicious when considering that many of these borrowers were closely linked to the promoters of RHFL.

Eventually, most of these borrowers failed to repay their loans, causing RHFL to default on its own debt obligations. This led to the company's resolution under the RBI Framework, leaving its public shareholders in a difficult position.

For example, in March 2018, RHFL's share price was around Rs 59.60. By March 2020, as the extent of the fraud became clear and the company was drained of its resources, the share price had plummeted to just Rs 0.75.

Even now, over 9 lakh shareholders remain invested in RHFL, facing significant losses.

The 24 restrained entities include former key officials of Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL) -- Amit Bapna, Ravindra Sudhalkar and Pinkesh R Shah -- and Sebi has imposed fine on them for their role in the case.

Also, the regulator levied a fine of Rs 25 crore on Ambani, Rs 27 crore on Bapna, Rs 26 crore on Sudhalkar and Rs 21 crore on Shah.

Additionally, the remaining entities including Reliance Unicorn Enterprises, Reliance Exchange next Lt, Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd, Reliance Cleangen Ltd, Reliance Business Broadcast News Holdings Ltd and Reliance Big Entertainment Private Ltd have been imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore each.

These fines have been levied on them for either receiving the illegally obtained loans or acted as intermediaries to facilitate the illegal diversion of funds from RHFL.

In February 2022, markets watchdog Sebi had passed an interim order and restrained Reliance Home Finance Ltd, industrialist Anil Ambani and three other individuals (Amit Bapna, Ravindra Sudhakar and Pinkesh R Shah) from the securities market till further orders for allegedly siphoning off funds from the company.

Markets regulator Sebi has barred industrialist Anil Ambani, 24 other entities, including former key officials of Reliance Home Finance from the securities market for five years for diversion of funds from the company.

Markets regulator Sebi has barred industrialist Anil Ambani, 24 other entities, including former key officials of Reliance Home Finance from the securities market for five years for diversion of funds from the company. Sebi has imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore on Ambani and restrained him from being associated with the securities market including as a director or Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) in any listed company, or any intermediary registered with the market regulator, for a period of 5 years. Also, the regulator barred Reliance Home Finance from the securities market for six months and slapped a fine of Rs 6 lakh on it. In its 222-page final order, Sebi found that Anil Ambani, with the help of RHFL's key managerial personnel, had orchestrated a fraudulent scheme to siphon-off funds from RHFL by disguising them as loans to entities linked to him. Also read: ChatGPT and Vogue publisher Condé Nast join hands for SearchGPT partnership. What does it mean? Although the Board of Directors of RHFL had issued strong directives to stop such lending practices and reviewed corporate loans regularly, the company's management ignored these orders. This suggests a significant failure of governance, driven by certain key managerial personnel under the influence of Anil Ambani. Given these circumstances, the company RHFL itself should not be held equally responsible as the individuals involved in the fraud. Further, the remaining entities have played the role of being either recipients of illegally obtained loans or conduits to enable illegal diversion of monies from RHFL, the regulator noted. Sebi said its findings have established the "existence of a fraudulent scheme, orchestrated by Noticee No. 2 (Anil Ambani) and administered by the KMPs of RHFL, to siphon off funds from the public listed company (RHFL) by structuring them as 'loans' to credit unworthy conduit borrowers, and in turn, to onward borrowers, all of whom have been found to be 'promoter linked entities' i.e. entities associated/ linked with Noticee 2 (Anil Ambani)". Ambani used his position as 'chairperson of the ADA group' and his significant indirect shareholding in the holding company of RHFL to orchestrate the fraud. Sebi, in its order on Thursday, noted the cavalier approach of the company's management and promoter in approving loans worth hundreds of crores to companies that had little to no assets, cash flow, net worth, or revenue. This suggests a sinister objective behind the 'loans'. The situation becomes even more suspicious when considering that many of these borrowers were closely linked to the promoters of RHFL. Eventually, most of these borrowers failed to repay their loans, causing RHFL to default on its own debt obligations. This led to the company's resolution under the RBI Framework, leaving its public shareholders in a difficult position. For example, in March 2018, RHFL's share price was around Rs 59.60. By March 2020, as the extent of the fraud became clear and the company was drained of its resources, the share price had plummeted to just Rs 0.75. Even now, over 9 lakh shareholders remain invested in RHFL, facing significant losses. The 24 restrained entities include former key officials of Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL) -- Amit Bapna, Ravindra Sudhalkar and Pinkesh R Shah -- and Sebi has imposed fine on them for their role in the case. Also, the regulator levied a fine of Rs 25 crore on Ambani, Rs 27 crore on Bapna, Rs 26 crore on Sudhalkar and Rs 21 crore on Shah. Additionally, the remaining entities including Reliance Unicorn Enterprises, Reliance Exchange next Lt, Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd, Reliance Cleangen Ltd, Reliance Business Broadcast News Holdings Ltd and Reliance Big Entertainment Private Ltd have been imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore each. These fines have been levied on them for either receiving the illegally obtained loans or acted as intermediaries to facilitate the illegal diversion of funds from RHFL. In February 2022, markets watchdog Sebi had passed an interim order and restrained Reliance Home Finance Ltd, industrialist Anil Ambani and three other individuals (Amit Bapna, Ravindra Sudhakar and Pinkesh R Shah) from the securities market till further orders for allegedly siphoning off funds from the company.

Sebi Bans Anil Ambani, 24 entities from securities market for 5 years

Amid ongoing controversy between Hindenburg Research and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch, the latter’s ties with US equity major Blackstone have also come under greater scrutiny. Experts are calling for an investigation over Buch’s alleged conflict of interest in all Blackstone-related matters as SEBI chairperson.

Notably, Madhabi’s husband Dhaval Buch has been serving as a senior advisor at Blackstone since July 2019. Earlier, Madhabi&nbsp;had stated that she recused herself from Blacktone-related issues but her statement didn’t clarify her position on matters related to companies indirectly involved with Blackstone or its subsidiaries.

In its report, Hindenburg had alleged that during Dhaval’s time as an advisor to Blackstone; SEBI proposed, approved and facilitated major Real estate investment trusts (REITs) regulations changes.

"Since Madhabi Buch became Chairperson in March 2022, SEBI has proposed and implemented a raft of REIT legislation, of significant benefit to Blackstone as one of the largest REIT sponsors in India, whom her husband works for," the Hindenburg report said.

In her statement, Buch, who became a full-time member at SEBI in April 2017 and later became its chief in March 2022, just dismissed these allegations, without providing any details.

“Blackstone is heavily invested in India. It is the promoter of many companies in India. That (Buch) has recused herself from Blackstone matters isn’t enough given the amount of investment they have in India," a veteran fund manager, requesting anonymity told The Morning Context.

There are several firms related to Blackstone, like Indiabulls Housing Finance (now Sammaan Capital), Aadhar Housing Finance, asset and wealth management firm ASK Investment Managers, hospital chain Care Hospitals and IT services provider Mphasis.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwj69onF64iIAxVkRmwGHaKQGIoQxfQBKAB6BAgJEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/what-is-sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-buchs-link-with-asset-manager-blackstone-all-about-751106" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/what-is-sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-buchs-link-with-asset-manager-blackstone-all-about-751106&amp;ved=2ahUKEwj69onF64iIAxVkRmwGHaKQGIoQxfQBKAB6BAgJEAE">What is SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch`s link with asset manager Blackstone all about?</a>

These firms come under Blackstone group's $50 billion umbrella in India, including $30bn in real estate only.

Now, there are concerns that SEBI chief Buch may have violated norms in dealing with certain firms. For instance, in May 2024, Aadhar Housing Finance (backed by Blackstone) went public, only after SEBI cleared its draft red herring prospectus.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwjjnNzM64iIAxVQRmcHHcjQCxgQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/hindenburg-vs-buch-how-the-1998-general-pinochet-case-serves-as-a-lesson-for-sebi-752031" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/hindenburg-vs-buch-how-the-1998-general-pinochet-case-serves-as-a-lesson-for-sebi-752031&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjjnNzM64iIAxVQRmcHHcjQCxgQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">Hindenburg vs Buch: How the 1998 General Pinochet case serves as a lesson for SEBI</a>

SEBI also cleared the IPO of a company controlled by Blackstone under the watch of Buch.

Now the question is, did Buch recuse herself from these cases as well? Only a detailed investigation against the SEBI chief may provide an answer.

(With inputs from agencies)

Amid ongoing controversy between Hindenburg Research and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch, the latter’s ties with US equity major Blackstone have also come under greater scrutiny.

Amid ongoing controversy between Hindenburg Research and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief Madhabi Puri Buch, the latter’s ties with US equity major Blackstone have also come under greater scrutiny. Experts are calling for an investigation over Buch’s alleged conflict of interest in all Blackstone-related matters as SEBI chairperson. Notably, Madhabi’s husband Dhaval Buch has been serving as a senior advisor at Blackstone since July 2019. Earlier, Madhabi had stated that she recused herself from Blacktone-related issues but her statement didn’t clarify her position on matters related to companies indirectly involved with Blackstone or its subsidiaries. In its report, Hindenburg had alleged that during Dhaval’s time as an advisor to Blackstone; SEBI proposed, approved and facilitated major Real estate investment trusts (REITs) regulations changes. "Since Madhabi Buch became Chairperson in March 2022, SEBI has proposed and implemented a raft of REIT legislation, of significant benefit to Blackstone as one of the largest REIT sponsors in India, whom her husband works for," the Hindenburg report said. In her statement, Buch, who became a full-time member at SEBI in April 2017 and later became its chief in March 2022, just dismissed these allegations, without providing any details. “Blackstone is heavily invested in India. It is the promoter of many companies in India. That (Buch) has recused herself from Blackstone matters isn’t enough given the amount of investment they have in India," a veteran fund manager, requesting anonymity told The Morning Context. There are several firms related to Blackstone, like Indiabulls Housing Finance (now Sammaan Capital), Aadhar Housing Finance, asset and wealth management firm ASK Investment Managers, hospital chain Care Hospitals and IT services provider Mphasis. Also read: What is SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch`s link with asset manager Blackstone all about? These firms come under Blackstone group's $50 billion umbrella in India, including $30bn in real estate only. Now, there are concerns that SEBI chief Buch may have violated norms in dealing with certain firms. For instance, in May 2024, Aadhar Housing Finance (backed by Blackstone) went public, only after SEBI cleared its draft red herring prospectus. Also read: Hindenburg vs Buch: How the 1998 General Pinochet case serves as a lesson for SEBI SEBI also cleared the IPO of a company controlled by Blackstone under the watch of Buch. Now the question is, did Buch recuse herself from these cases as well? Only a detailed investigation against the SEBI chief may provide an answer. (With inputs from agencies)

Why SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch’s ties with Blackstone warrant an investigation

Indian former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy has made fresh allegations against embattled SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch. During a recent case hearing of the Axis-Max Life deal at the Delhi High Court, Swamy alleged a lack of action from the market regulator SEBI. He credited this to a potential conflict of interest on Buch's part. &nbsp;

<h2 bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:7,&quot;y&quot;:84,&quot;w&quot;:813,&quot;h&quot;:25,&quot;abs_x&quot;:40,&quot;abs_y&quot;:1924}">The case</h2>

The case in the Delhi High Court involves regulatory scrutiny of transactions between Axis Bank and Max Life Insurance Company.&nbsp;

In February 2024, Bharatiya Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Delhi High Court against Axis Bank and Max Life Insurance Company. The PIL alleged that Axis Bank made undue profits of about ₹4,000 crore ($477 million) from the sale and purchase of Max Life shares between February 2016 and April 2021.

Also read |&nbsp;<a bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:88,&quot;y&quot;:226,&quot;w&quot;:452,&quot;h&quot;:16,&quot;abs_x&quot;:121,&quot;abs_y&quot;:2066}" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bjp-announces-nine-candidates-for-sept-3-rajya-sabha-bypolls-751779">BJP announces nine candidates for Sept 3 Rajya Sabha bypolls</a>

It came into the limelight due to allegations that SEBI's actions might be compromised.&nbsp;

Swamy, in an affidavit dated March 13, highlighted that Madhabi Puri Buch, the SEBI chairperson, served as the director at Max Healthcare Institute Ltd from February 2015 to April 2017.&nbsp;

The former union minister argued that this past affiliation of Buch's might have contributed to a delay in the market regulators' investigation into the alleged misconduct.

Also read |&nbsp;<a bis_size="{&quot;x&quot;:88,&quot;y&quot;:388,&quot;w&quot;:482,&quot;h&quot;:16,&quot;abs_x&quot;:121,&quot;abs_y&quot;:2228}" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-japan-hold-22-ministerial-dialogue-focusing-on-indo-pacific-751730">India, Japan hold '2+2' ministerial dialogue focusing on Indo-Pacific</a>

SEBI, however, has maintained that its inquiry into the deal is progressing. In an affidavit, the market regulator has asserted that the preliminary investigation is at an advanced stage.&nbsp;

The court acknowledged that the SEBI chairperson, despite the personal allegation, was not listed as a respondent in the petition. Regardless of any previous professional ties, the court highlighted that SEBI must regulate the case as per legal standards. Swamy's PIL was dismissed by the court, but the regulatory bodies were instructed to speed up their investigations and enforce the law.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

Indian former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy has made fresh allegations against embattled SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch. During a recent case hearing of the Axis-Max Life deal at the Delhi High Court, Swamy alleged a lack of action from the market regulator SEBI.

Indian former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy has made fresh allegations against embattled SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch. During a recent case hearing of the Axis-Max Life deal at the Delhi High Court, Swamy alleged a lack of action from the market regulator SEBI. He credited this to a potential conflict of interest on Buch's part. The case The case in the Delhi High Court involves regulatory scrutiny of transactions between Axis Bank and Max Life Insurance Company. In February 2024, Bharatiya Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Delhi High Court against Axis Bank and Max Life Insurance Company. The PIL alleged that Axis Bank made undue profits of about ₹4,000 crore ($477 million) from the sale and purchase of Max Life shares between February 2016 and April 2021. Also read | BJP announces nine candidates for Sept 3 Rajya Sabha bypolls It came into the limelight due to allegations that SEBI's actions might be compromised. Swamy, in an affidavit dated March 13, highlighted that Madhabi Puri Buch, the SEBI chairperson, served as the director at Max Healthcare Institute Ltd from February 2015 to April 2017. The former union minister argued that this past affiliation of Buch's might have contributed to a delay in the market regulators' investigation into the alleged misconduct. Also read | India, Japan hold '2+2' ministerial dialogue focusing on Indo-Pacific SEBI, however, has maintained that its inquiry into the deal is progressing. In an affidavit, the market regulator has asserted that the preliminary investigation is at an advanced stage. The court acknowledged that the SEBI chairperson, despite the personal allegation, was not listed as a respondent in the petition. Regardless of any previous professional ties, the court highlighted that SEBI must regulate the case as per legal standards. Swamy's PIL was dismissed by the court, but the regulatory bodies were instructed to speed up their investigations and enforce the law. (With inputs from agencies)

Exclusive | SEBI chief Buch under fire; Subramanian Swamy alleges conflict of interest in Axis-Max Life deal

In the ongoing saga between Hindenburg and the SEBI Chief, calls for an independent probe have gained traction. Media stories suggested a probe is underway. However, separate media reports quoting finance ministry sources show the government has no plans to initiate an investigation at this point. This rise in speculation has highlighted the silence of the government and the SEBI on Hindenburg's allegations.

Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief Saga

Amid the ongoing controversy between the chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Madhabi Puri Buch, and Hindenburg Research over the probe into Adani Group; parallels are being drawn with a 1998 UK case involving Chilean dictator General Pinochet.

<h2>The 1998 General Pinochet case</h2>

The Chilean dictator was visiting the UK in 1998 when he was arrested there for human rights violations. A court ruling found General Pinochet guilty, but later it was overturned when it emerged that one of the judges on the panel had a conflict of interest.

Lord Hoffmann, one of the judges, had close ties with Amnesty International (AI), which was representing the Chilean victims. Also, Hoffmann’s wife was linked to AI. Hoffmann himself was the director of Amnesty International Charity Limited, a sister entity which had reported on Chile’s human rights violations.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiDrLWVtIaIAxWMs1YBHfaGN6oQxfQBKAB6BAgLEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-under-fire-again-subramanian-swamy-alleges-conflict-of-interest-in-axis-max-life-deal-751790" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/sebi-chief-madhabi-puri-under-fire-again-subramanian-swamy-alleges-conflict-of-interest-in-axis-max-life-deal-751790&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiDrLWVtIaIAxWMs1YBHfaGN6oQxfQBKAB6BAgLEAE">Exclusive | SEBI chief Buch under fire; Subramanian Swamy alleges conflict of interest in Axis-Max Life deal</a>

When the revelations came, Pinochet’s legal team appealed the decision with the House of Lords, urging the ruling to be set aside. As a result, Lord Hoffmann was disqualified from the case and a rehearing was ordered.

One judge on the four-member panel said, “His (Hoffmann’s) relationship with Amnesty International was such that he was, in effect, acting as a judge in his own cause.”

<h2>How it’s linked to the SEBI case?</h2>

Allegations against SEBI chief Buch, levelled by Hindenburg Research, also indicate that ‘she acted as a judge in her own cause’.

Here are three major allegations against Buch:

1. Investments in an offshore entity under SEBI investigation connected to Vinod Adani, the elder brother of Gautam Adani.

2. A 99 per cent ownership in an advisory firm, called Agora Advisory, used by her husband for business consulting. Reuters reported that she even earned revenue from the firm during her seven-year tenure, potentially violating SEBI norms.

3. Promoting an asset class in which her husband had a perceived interest.

<h2>Buch’s response</h2>

Buch in a statement on Aug 11 just denied the allegations, without providing any details.

Despite the allegations by Hindenburg, Buch didn’t recuse herself from the investigation against the Adani group. Pinochet case reveals how a conflict of interest can be taken as a ground to dismiss the investigation as well as the ruling. This also indicates that the integrity of the investigation may have been severely compromised.

Watch: Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief Saga

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/hindenburg-vs-sebi-chief-saga-751835/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Experts also believe that the SEBI chairperson should have revealed the conflict of interest.

Former SEBI chairman CB Bhave was quoted as saying in media reports that Buch should have demanded a recusal from the finance ministry.

(With inputs from agencies)

Amid the ongoing controversy between the chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Madhabi Puri Buch, and Hindenburg Research over the probe into Adani Group; parallels are being drawn with a 1998 UK case involving Chilean dictator General Pinochet.

Amid the ongoing controversy between the chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Madhabi Puri Buch, and Hindenburg Research over the probe into Adani Group; parallels are being drawn with a 1998 UK case involving Chilean dictator General Pinochet. The 1998 General Pinochet case The Chilean dictator was visiting the UK in 1998 when he was arrested there for human rights violations. A court ruling found General Pinochet guilty, but later it was overturned when it emerged that one of the judges on the panel had a conflict of interest. Lord Hoffmann, one of the judges, had close ties with Amnesty International (AI), which was representing the Chilean victims. Also, Hoffmann’s wife was linked to AI. Hoffmann himself was the director of Amnesty International Charity Limited, a sister entity which had reported on Chile’s human rights violations. Also read: Exclusive | SEBI chief Buch under fire; Subramanian Swamy alleges conflict of interest in Axis-Max Life deal When the revelations came, Pinochet’s legal team appealed the decision with the House of Lords, urging the ruling to be set aside. As a result, Lord Hoffmann was disqualified from the case and a rehearing was ordered. One judge on the four-member panel said, “His (Hoffmann’s) relationship with Amnesty International was such that he was, in effect, acting as a judge in his own cause.” How it’s linked to the SEBI case? Allegations against SEBI chief Buch, levelled by Hindenburg Research, also indicate that ‘she acted as a judge in her own cause’. Here are three major allegations against Buch: 1. Investments in an offshore entity under SEBI investigation connected to Vinod Adani, the elder brother of Gautam Adani. 2. A 99 per cent ownership in an advisory firm, called Agora Advisory, used by her husband for business consulting. Reuters reported that she even earned revenue from the firm during her seven-year tenure, potentially violating SEBI norms. 3. Promoting an asset class in which her husband had a perceived interest. Buch’s response Buch in a statement on Aug 11 just denied the allegations, without providing any details. Despite the allegations by Hindenburg, Buch didn’t recuse herself from the investigation against the Adani group. Pinochet case reveals how a conflict of interest can be taken as a ground to dismiss the investigation as well as the ruling. This also indicates that the integrity of the investigation may have been severely compromised. Watch: Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief Saga × Experts also believe that the SEBI chairperson should have revealed the conflict of interest. Former SEBI chairman CB Bhave was quoted as saying in media reports that Buch should have demanded a recusal from the finance ministry. (With inputs from agencies)

Hindenburg vs Buch: How the 1998 General Pinochet case serves as a lesson for SEBI

Charges of a conflict of interest have been levelled against SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch. The question now doing the rounds is: Did Buch potentially violate SEBI's 2008 policy on officials holding other professional jobs?

SEBI chief's earnings under scrutiny

Ever since US-based short seller Hindenburg Research released its new, damning report linking the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chairperson Madbhabi Puri Buch and Adani conglomerate, the&nbsp; Indian market regulator's credibility has taken a nosedive.&nbsp;

This is because SEBI appears reluctant to open an investigation against its&nbsp;chairperson about her alleged investment in funds linked to the Adani money siphoning scandal, as highlighted in the Hindenburg report.&nbsp;

After the report was released on August 10, SEBI released its cookie-cutter response via a press release and to this date, it is the only form of clarification that the regulator has issued on the matter. Neither the board of directors nor the finance ministry, which oversees SEBI, have come up with their version of the events.&nbsp;

Additionally, the clarification rather skims past the fact that Madhabi, alongside her husband Dhaval Buch, invested in funds that were used by Vinod Adani, the brother of Adani Group chief Gautam Adani.&nbsp;&nbsp;

In April earlier this year, media reports claimed that investigation against 12 offshore companies that invested in Adani stocks would be settled. A couple of months later, a showcause notice was issued to Hindenburg over its report, which suggests that something had transpired behind the scenes.

Reports also claim that Madhabi held two meetings with Gautam Adani while the investigation was underway.&nbsp;

Also watch | World Business Watch: Hindenburg vs SEBI chief- What are experts' opinions hinting at?

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/hindenburg-vs-sebi-chief-what-are-experts-opinions-hinting-at-751070/embed" width="560"></iframe>

<h2>Calls grow for probe against Madhabi</h2>

Leader of Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha (Lower House of Indian Parliament) and Indian National Congress (INC) leader, Rahul Gandhi has demanded a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) inquiry into the charges against the watchdog chief.&nbsp;

Gandhi asked the government if something were to go wrong and investors were to lose their hard-earned money, then "who would be held responsible?"&nbsp;

“Is the Prime Minister of India responsible? Is Madhabi Buch responsible, or is Mr&nbsp;Adani responsible? It’s slowly becoming crystal clear why PM [Narendra] Modi is against a JPC looking into this matter,” said Gandhi.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/hindenburg-vs-sebi-chief-madhabi-buchs-consulting-firm-shares-address-with-its-auditor-says-report-751099">Also read |&nbsp;Hindenburg vs SEBI chief: Madhabi Buch's consulting firm shares address with its auditor, says report</a>

Meanwhile,&nbsp;former finance ministry secretary EAS Sarma told WION that an&nbsp;independent judicial panel should probe the alleged links between Adani Group and the SEBI chairperson.&nbsp;

"Such accusations should wake up the powers that be to refrain from interfering with the independence of any statutory institution for that matter, as such interference will erode public trust and credibility of that institution," he added.&nbsp;

Last week,&nbsp;a petition was filed in the Supreme Court, urging it to direct the completion of a probe into Adani that it had ordered after Hindenburg made the first allegations. The petition said the claims by Hindenburg create an ‘atmosphere of doubt’.

(With inputs from agencies)

Ever since US-based short seller Hindenburg Research released its new, damning report linking the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chairperson Madbhabi Puri Buch and Adani conglomerate, the Indian market regulator's credibility has taken a nosedive.

Ever since US-based short seller Hindenburg Research released its new, damning report linking the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chairperson Madbhabi Puri Buch and Adani conglomerate, the Indian market regulator's credibility has taken a nosedive. This is because SEBI appears reluctant to open an investigation against its chairperson about her alleged investment in funds linked to the Adani money siphoning scandal, as highlighted in the Hindenburg report. After the report was released on August 10, SEBI released its cookie-cutter response via a press release and to this date, it is the only form of clarification that the regulator has issued on the matter. Neither the board of directors nor the finance ministry, which oversees SEBI, have come up with their version of the events. Additionally, the clarification rather skims past the fact that Madhabi, alongside her husband Dhaval Buch, invested in funds that were used by Vinod Adani, the brother of Adani Group chief Gautam Adani. In April earlier this year, media reports claimed that investigation against 12 offshore companies that invested in Adani stocks would be settled. A couple of months later, a showcause notice was issued to Hindenburg over its report, which suggests that something had transpired behind the scenes. Reports also claim that Madhabi held two meetings with Gautam Adani while the investigation was underway. Also watch | World Business Watch: Hindenburg vs SEBI chief- What are experts' opinions hinting at? Calls grow for probe against Madhabi Leader of Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha (Lower House of Indian Parliament) and Indian National Congress (INC) leader, Rahul Gandhi has demanded a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) inquiry into the charges against the watchdog chief. Gandhi asked the government if something were to go wrong and investors were to lose their hard-earned money, then "who would be held responsible?" “Is the Prime Minister of India responsible? Is Madhabi Buch responsible, or is Mr Adani responsible? It’s slowly becoming crystal clear why PM [Narendra] Modi is against a JPC looking into this matter,” said Gandhi. Also read | Hindenburg vs SEBI chief: Madhabi Buch's consulting firm shares address with its auditor, says report Meanwhile, former finance ministry secretary EAS Sarma told WION that an independent judicial panel should probe the alleged links between Adani Group and the SEBI chairperson. "Such accusations should wake up the powers that be to refrain from interfering with the independence of any statutory institution for that matter, as such interference will erode public trust and credibility of that institution," he added. Last week, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court, urging it to direct the completion of a probe into Adani that it had ordered after Hindenburg made the first allegations. The petition said the claims by Hindenburg create an ‘atmosphere of doubt’. (With inputs from agencies)

Madhuri Buch-Adani links: Why is SEBI’s credibility at an all-time low after latest Hindenburg report?

In the Hindenburg vs Adani saga, markets have looked past the face-off. However, 42,000 crore rupees of mutual funds money is riding on the Adani group firms' stocks. The market impact has waned this time around. However, Hindenburg's allegations could weigh heavily on small investors.

Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief: What are experts' opinions hinting at?

Hindenburg vs SEBI Chief: What are the key issues of conflict allegations

Major controversy hits India’s financial sector as SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch faces allegations of conflict of interest from US short-seller Hindenburg research. Was there an undisclosed link to the Adani group? Watch WION Decodes as we break down the high-stakes drama and its potential impact on India's financial markets.

SEBI Chief Accused: Controversial ties

Hindenburg vs SBI Chief Saga: Decoding key issues of conflict allegations

Hindenburg vs Adani: Is the mutual fund market at risk?

sebi

Sebi, News on Sebi, stories on Sebi, articles on Sebi, Sebi stories at Wion, Sebi news, Sebi latest news