AHILYA SHARMA AND OTHERS YOUNUS SULTAN vs THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA — CRR/2045/2026
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397/401/482. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 21st May 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0218942026
Filing Number
CRR/2031/2026
Filing Date
14-May-2026
Registration No
CRR/2045/2026
Registration Date
14-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )
Sub-Category
Exercise of inherent power u/s 482 Cr. P. C. ( 40 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL SECTION
Decision Date
21-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 29-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AHILYA SHARMA AND OTHERS YOUNUS SULTAN
-
2.SHASHI REKHA KUMARI
-
3.SHASHI KANT SHARMA
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
21-May-2026
Hon'ble Justice Kausik ChandaView PDF
Summary of CRR 2045/2026 The High Court allowed the petitioners' application under Section 205 CrPC for dispensation of personal appearance in a SEBI complaint case, reversing the Special Judge's rejection which was unduly influenced by the petitioners' advocate's misconduct (falsely claiming unavailability due to voting). The Court found sufficient grounds for non-appearance during quashing proceedings and merit in dispensation, particularly given the petitioners' Patna residence and inclusion of two women, conditioned on Rs. 15,000 payment to the High Court Legal Services Committee. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-May-2026
Hon'ble Justice Kausik ChandaView PDF
-
19-May-2026
New Motion
Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda
-
18-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
14-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRR/2045/2026
Summary of CRR 2045/2026 The High Court allowed the petitioners' application under Section 205 CrPC for dispensation of personal appearance in a SEBI complaint case, reversing the Special Judge's rejection which was unduly influenced by the petitioners' advocate's misconduct (falsely claiming unavailability due to voting). The Court found sufficient grounds for non-appearance during quashing proceedings and merit in dispensation, particularly given the petitioners' Patna residence and inclusion of two women, conditioned on Rs. 15,000 payment to the High Court Legal Services Committee. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts