Anil Ambani banned from trading in stock markets for 5 years, fined Rs 25 crore
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) on Friday banned industrialist Anil Ambani and 24 entities associated with him from trading in the stock exchange for a period of five years. SEBI has also imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore on Anil Ambani and restrained him from being associated with the securities market, including as a director or key managerial personnel in any listed company, or any intermediary registered with the market regulator.
Anil Ambani, 24 entities banned
The market regulator also barred Reliance Home Finance Ltd. from the securities market for six months with a fine of Rs 6 lakh. The other 24 entities that have been barred include Amit Bapna, Ravindra Sudhalkar, and Pinkesh R. Shah¡ªformer key officials of RHFL. The regulator levied a fine of Rs 27 crore on Bapna, Rs 26 crore on Sudhalkar, and Rs 21 crore on Shah.
Also read:?These Are The Companies Bidding For Anil Ambani's Debt-ridden Reliance Capital
The remaining entities¡ªReliance Unicorn Enterprises, Reliance Exchange Next Ltd., Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd., Reliance Cleangen Ltd., Reliance Business Broadcast News Holdings Ltd., and Reliance Big Entertainment Private Ltd.¡ªwere imposed a penalty of Rs 25 crore each. These fines were levied for ¡°either receiving the illegally obtained loans or acting as intermediaries to facilitate the illegal diversion of funds from RHFL.¡±
Accusations against Anil Ambani
The action comes after SEBI found that Anil Ambani, with the help of RHFL's key managerial personnel, had orchestrated a fraudulent scheme to siphon off funds from RHFL by disguising them as loans to entities linked to him.
Although the Board of Directors of RHFL had issued strong directives to stop such lending practices and reviewed corporate loans regularly, the company's management ignored these orders. This suggests a significant failure of governance, driven by certain key managerial personnel under the influence of Anil Ambani.
Given these circumstances, the company RHFL itself should not be held equally responsible as the individuals involved in the fraud. Further, the remaining entities have played the role of either recipients of illegally obtained loans or conduits to enable the illegal diversion of monies from RHFL, the regulator noted.
For more news and current affairs?from around the world, please visit?Indiatimes News.
