Sun Pharma: SEBI Refuses To Disclose Information under RTI on Whistleblower Document and Action Taken 
Market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has turned down a Right to Information (RTI) request followed up by an appeal to provide information on the documents provided by a whistleblower in the Sun Pharmaceutical matter. Interestingly, the refusal is on the grounds that it will affect.
 
Responding to first appeal filed by an applicant, the market regulator says, "Providing copy of the complaint would reveal the identity of the whistleblower and may lead to the undesirable consequences of danger to the life or physical safety of the person."
 
 Interestingly, Moneylife already has a copy of the whistle-blower's letter and have also disclosed important and verifiable parts of it. However, there are no names/identification mentioned in the letter which makes it very difficult to identify anyone as the whistleblower. (Read: Whistleblower Files 150-Page Complaint with SEBI about Sudhir Valia Group, Dilip Shanghvi and Sun Pharma)
 
 
In any case, the applicant had not asked for details about the whistleblower and had specifically mentioned that anything sensitive can be redacted.  
 
SEBI, however, argued that, "Severing the name and personal details of the whistleblower from the complaint may not be sufficient to avoid the perceived danger, since the contents of the complaint, the language used, timing of the complaint may be sufficient to ascertain identity of the whistleblower. Similarly, the file notings in the matter may reveal identity of the dealing officials by factors similar to those mentioned above, including the handwriting, hierarchy of officials in the particular department dealing in the matter.”
 
“Whistleblower complaints are made with an objective that the information contained in the complaints may be used for examination of the alleged irregularities by SEBI which may result in enforcement actions. Such complaints may, therefore, be considered as a source of information and assistance given in confidence for law enforcement, which is specially exempt from disclosures under section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act,” SEBI stated.
 
While denying information under the RTI Act, the market regulator accepted that "complaints from whistleblowers are vital source of information for enforcement authorities and that such complaints are relevant for SEBI in discharging its statutory obligation to regulate securities market." 
 
"...it is further observed that complaints from whistleblowers are received and held by SEBI in a fiduciary capacity, since such complaints are made under an implicit trust that identity of the complainant would be kept confidential and that allegations mentioned in the complaint would be examined by SEBI in the interest of investors and securities market," Anand Baiwar, first appellate authority at SEBI stated in its order. 
 
In a sensational 150-page document, a whistleblower has alleged numerous irregularities against Sun Pharma, its main promoter Dilip Shanghvi and his brother-in-law Sudhir Valia, Mr Valia’s independent financial operations, Fortune Financial and Investment Trust of India and Dharmesh Doshi, an associate of Ketan Parekh who has been convicted of wrongdoing in the stock market scam of 2001.  
 
Moneylife has a copy of this document filed with the regulator in mid-September. Copies of this letter have been marked to the Ajay Tyagi, chairman of SEBI and whole-time directors Madhabi Puri Buch, G Mahalingam and Ananta Barua. Sun Pharma, in an official response to Moneylife in November last year had said that it has not received any query from the regulator so far. 
 
The 150-page document has names, phone numbers, bank account statements and complex organisation charts of hundreds of companies, foreign investors and individuals that are acting in concert.  
 
In the covering letter to the SEBI chairman and the whole-time member, the whistleblower mentions that “for me to reach to this level of detailed letter to you along with the evidences gathered over a period, has taken an extraordinary level of efforts at my end and weeks of data compilation. Further it has added lot of risk to my family, my life and my family’s future." 
 
The whistleblower claims to be “very closely connected to the people mentioned… My association with this set of people has been for more than 23 years now and I am directly working with them for 15 years and currently as a senior executive with the group. In my career with them, I have handled their Romania, Israel, USA and Mauritius operations directly.”  
 
He claims not to be a beneficiary of the operations described “regularly drawing salary as my primary income and has never had anything beyond that during my entire tenure. The very reason I have decided to share this is because there are some deals that have gone bad and to cover them up from difficult questions coming along, now the management is asking the professional staff to front that event which I am not ready to do. Therefore, over a period of 6 months, I have gradually gathered all relevant evidences to present my case and bring out a rightful conclusion to this episode.”
 
Later, the same whistleblower sent a 172-page document to SEBI "to bring out further information of wrongdoings by Sun Pharma promoters Mr Shanghvi and Mr Valia. You may kindly refer this along with my previous submission and the contents presented therein.” 
 
Moneylife has written several articles on Sun Pharma, which are in the public domain. 
 
You may want to read…
 
 
 
 
 
 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

SuchindranathAiyerS

6 days ago

SEBI is Bharath Sarkar dodging accountability through contumacious opacity. It shows by its refusal to disclose information under RTI on whistleblower document and action taken: Corruption Zindabad!

Shankhadeep Nath

6 days ago

SEBI is trying to protect the whistle blower indentity but Moneylife goes on to selectively provide contents from the report which gives out the identity of the whistle blower.

GLN Prasad

1 week ago

True. The denial appears to be genuine to protect a whistleblower. As from the style and language of the letter, there is technology to identify the person, if such other letter drafted by a whistleblower (Suspect) is already available in the system. Most Universities are using the same to check the authenticity of thesis/research papers submitted for awarding doctorate and if such material/thesis was already published by any other university, they can come to know of the original author if any. As such information can only be disclosed by near and dear insiders, they can suspect some persons and check for confirmation of their doubts and may get an idea of the whistleblower.

Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Ordinance, 2019: A Double-edged Sword
When the Union government promulgated The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Ordinance, 2019 (the Ordinance) a few days ago, the immediate reaction was one of dismay. 
 
There is no denying the fact that unscrupulous people dupe the greedy and gullible by soliciting loans and deposits promising high returns. It is also true that such dubious schemes and ponzis have cheated...
Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MAS member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation
51% vote enough for forensic audit of corporate debtor: NCLT
The city bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Thursday clarified that a 51 per cent vote of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) was enough to initiate a forensic audit of an insolvent company.
 
Citing Section 21(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), the NCLT bench said the provision makes it necessary for all decisions of the CoC to be taken by a vote of not less than 51 per cent and the same goes for forensic audit.
 
In a case related to Viceroy Hotels, where the resolution professional declined a forensic audit citing Section 28(3) which requires 66 per cent voting for matters mentioned in Section 28(1), the bench said forensic audit did not fall in the category.
 
While Section 28(1) needs 66 per cent votes to make changes in the appointment of contract of statutory auditors or internal auditors of the corporate debtor, conducting a forensic audit did not amount to changing the terms of the statutory auditors, the bench said.
 
In several insolvency cases with the bankruptcy court, creditors are interested in knowing the actual details of the financial transactions of the company funded by them as it may expose some fraudulent activities that led the company to bankruptcy.
 
Forensic audit uses financial and qualitative tools to detect fraud patterns. The auditors, who need specific skills to conduct forensic audits, also use special software for financial analysis.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)