MARKETS regulator Sebi has moved the Supreme Court seeking direction to two Sahara firms to pay Rs 62,602.90 crore in compliance with the court’s earlier orders, failing which the group’s chief Subrata Roy be taken into custody. Sebi said the contemnors, Roy and his two firms-- Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd. (SHICL) -- are in “gross violation” of various orders passed by the court regarding the deposit of entire money collected along with the interest. Despite the top court granting various reliefs to Roy and his firms, they have neglected and failed to comply with various orders passed by this court, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) said.
In its intervention application filed on November 18, Sebi said the “contemnors have not been complying with the orders passed by this Court despite the long rope provided to them” and their liability is increasing daily. “The contemnors are enjoying their release from custody’ as granted by this court vide order dated May 6, 20l6, further extended by this Court from time to time ‘without even any attempt at compliance with the orders passed by this Court,” it said. The markets regulator said that it would be just, expedient and in the interest of justice that this court pass appropriate orders directing the Saharas to forthwith deposit the balance amount, which was Rs 62,602.90 crore as on September 30 this year, in Sebi-SAHARA refund account.
Failing this, Sebi said, “the contemnors may be directed to be taken into custody” as was directed by the top court in its verdict on June 15, 2015. The top court on August 31, 2012 in a series of directions had directed that SIRECL and SHICL would refund the amount collected from individual investors or group of investors, with interest of 15 per cent per annum to Sebi, from the date of receipt of the subscription amount till the date of repayment within three months to be deposited in a nationalised bank bearing maximum rate of interest.
The Sahara firms were also directed by the top court in 2012 to furnish the details with supporting documents to Sebi for establishing whether they had refunded any amount to the persons who had subscribed to the groups schemes.