Sebi to complete FTIL group probe by July end

To submit findings to Bombay HC at next hearing in August

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) will complete its investigation into complaints against Financial Technologies India Limited (FTIL, now 63 Moons) and several other entities associated with it by the end of next month.

In an order passed earlier this week, the bench of RM Sawant and Sadhana S Jadhav of the Bombay High Court said that the market regulator has agreed to complete the investigation "latest by 31/07/2017" and submit the findings to the court in the next hearing. The regulator has also submitted another report in a sealed cover to the court in compliance with its directions in December. 

The order came after a hearing in the writ petition filed against the regulator by some aggrieved investors of National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL), an FTIL subsidiary.

Smita Bhartia, Meenal Maheshwari and IGL Finance, who had invested in NSEL contracts and lost money in the 2013 payment crisis, had filed the writ petition in February 2016 seeking an investigation into alleged violations of various securities market regulations. 

The petitioners had cited details of several market transactions by various entities including key managerial personnel in the run up to the crisis and certain overseas deals after the crisis in the writ petition. They had also asked for a copy of the forensic audit report by Kalyaniwala & Mistry on MCX Stock Exchange. 

A 63 Moons spokesperson said, “We came to know from Bombay High Court website that the query you have raised is pertaining to a case filed by Smita Bhartia in Bombay High Court against the SEBI. We are not a party to this case and not aware of the subject matter. Therefore, we will not be able to comment on the same."

This is the second writ petition filed by the same set of investors in the matter. The Bombay High Court had disposed of the first writ in August 2015 asking Sebi to initiate proceedings. But, investors filed the second writ six months later saying no action was forthcoming and this time sought that the investigation report is filed with the court.

The case was adjourned to August 2 with a remark that it could be disposed of on that day itself.