sebi:QJA/SS/IVD/ID4/32226/2025-26
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Charge against Noticee Nos. 19 and 20 found unclear, vague and not sustainable; their role retained only as material context for other Noticees
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 11
- s. 11(4)
- s. 19
- s. 11(1)
- s. 12A
- s. 15H
- s. 11D
- s. 12
- s. 11A
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
- s. 15
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
- s. 28B
- s. 12(3)
- s. 11(5)
- s. 28B(2)
- s. 29(1)
Regulations
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 9
- Reg. 12
- Reg. 10
- Reg. 3(a)
- Reg. 2(1)
- Reg. 4(2)(d)
Holding
The charge against Noticees No. 19 and 20 was held unclear, vague and hence not sustainable. Their trading was retained only as material context for examining the acts and conduct of the other Noticees.
Full text
_________________________________________________________________________________ Order in the matter of Retro Green Revolution Limited. Page 2 of 61
_________________________________________________________________________________ Order in the matter of Retro Green Revolution Limited. Page 3 of 61
_________________________________________________________________________________ Order in the matter of Retro Green Revolution Limited. Page 4 of 61
You have read the preview. Create a free account to read the full order, track this party, and analyse it in Ontology.
Free accounts include 10 searches/day with full order access.
Source: SecMarx — sebi:QJA/SS/IVD/ID4/32226/2025-26. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (bench, timelines, appeal chain) is cited to us.