Securities And Exchange Board of India v. Rajesh Mokashi
The Board and the Securities Appellate Tribunal must decide on the evidence brought on record under sections 11C and 15U of the SEBI Act, 1992 and must not rely on external enquiry reports that do not form part of the investigation or enquiry.
By CA Nikhil Gupta · Reviewed against the retained judgment 2026-10-14
SEBI appealed against a judgment of the Securities Appellate Tribunal of 27 June 2025. The Supreme Court saw no error of fact or law in the Tribunal's conclusions but clarified that the Board and the Tribunal must base decisions only on evidence on record. It held that costs of ₹5 lakh imposed on SEBI were not justified and set that part aside.
What happened
SEBI filed Civil Appeal No. 11757/2025 against the judgment and order dated 27 June 2025 of the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, in Appeal No. 496 of 2023, in which Rajesh Mokashi was the respondent. The Supreme Court heard counsel for SEBI and senior counsel for the respondent on 11 March 2026.
Questions before the court
- Must SEBI and the Appellate Tribunal confine themselves to evidence on record, and was the order of costs against SEBI justified?
Why the court ruled this way
The Court noted that SEBI exercises jurisdiction to determine disputes and is specifically empowered to take evidence under section 11C of the SEBI Act, 1992, and that the Appellate Tribunal, in exercising appellate jurisdiction, is empowered to conduct its proceedings effectively under section 15U (paragraph 3). It said decisions of the Board or the Tribunal must rest on evidence brought on record and that external enquiry reports which do not form part of the investigation and enquiry should not be relied on (paragraph 4). On costs, it was of the opinion that the imposition of ₹5,00,000 on the appellant was not justified (paragraph 7).
Controlling point
While finding no error in the Tribunal's conclusions, the Court clarified that decisions by SEBI and the Tribunal must rest on evidence on record and not on external enquiry reports outside the investigation or enquiry.
Order and next steps
The appeal was disposed of with the clarification in paragraphs 3 and 4. The costs of ₹5,00,000 imposed on SEBI by the Securities Appellate Tribunal were set aside to that extent, and pending applications were disposed of.
Practical implications
A party before SEBI or the SAT should check what material the order rests on, and object where it relies on an external enquiry report that was not part of the investigation or enquiry and was not placed on record.
Limits of this ruling
- The order is a short disposal; it does not set out the facts of the case or the Tribunal's reasoning, which must be read in the Tribunal's order of 27 June 2025.
Law and judgment source
- Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, sections 11C and 15U
The linked PDF is a complete public court-copy document. The official court portal is provided for independent verification; a stable judgment-specific official link was not independently established.
Source checked: 2026-10-14 · Judgment paragraphs: paragraphs 3–7 · Later case history: not verified. Verify appeals, stays and subsequent orders before reliance.
This page is informational. Verify the current official court record, subsequent history and applicable law, and obtain professional advice for a specific matter.