SERCURITIES EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA vs AMIT JAIN

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 20.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 11.12.2025 + LPA 412/2018 & CM APPL. 30368/2018 (Stay) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sandhya Kohli, Advocate. versus AMIT JAIN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rishabh Jain, Advocate. + LPA 550/2018 AMIT JAIN .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rishabh Jain, Advocate. versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sandhya Kohli and Mr. Nimish Kumar, Advocates. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA LPA 412/2018 & LPA 550/2018 Page 1 of 17 Signing Date:12.12.2025 17:05:22 1. These two cross Letters Patent Appeals, LPA 412/2018 and LPA 550/2018, filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent read with Section 5(1) of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, assail the Judgment dated 09.07.20181 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8394/2014, titled “Amit Jain v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr.”. 2. By the Impugned Judgment, the learned Single Judge set aside the Show Cause Notice dated 14.11.2013 and the consequential adjudication proceedings on the ground that the appointment of the Adjudicating Officer2, in the absence of a recorded opinion under Rule 3 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 19953, was without jurisdiction. 3. As both appeals stem from the same Impugned Judgment, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, clarity, and to