SEBI sees sharp rise in settlement pleas, collects over Rs 860 crore in FY25

Mumbai, Aug 17 (IANS) The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) received a record number of settlement applications in 2024-25, showing a clear trend of entities preferring to resolve disputes without prolonged litigation.

According to the SEBI’s latest annual report, the regulator received 703 settlement pleas during the year, a sharp rise from 434 in the previous financial year.

Of these applications, 284 were resolved through settlement orders, while another 272 were either rejected, withdrawn, or returned.

Through the cases that were settled, the SEBI collected Rs 798.87 crore as settlement charges and an additional Rs 64.84 crore as disgorgement charges.

The settlement mechanism allows companies and individuals accused of violating securities laws to close cases by paying a fee and meeting certain conditions, rather than contesting them in court.

The violations in these cases covered a wide range, including insider trading, fraudulent trading, Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), mutual funds, and Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs).

Alongside settlement cases, the SEBI also dealt with a large number of appeals during the year.

A total of 533 new appeals were filed before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) in 2024-25, compared with 821 in the previous year.

Out of these, 422 appeals were disposed of, with most being dismissed. Around 73 per cent of appeals were rejected, 5 per cent were allowed, 10 per cent were upheld with modifications, 5 per cent were remanded, and 7 per cent were withdrawn.

A majority of these appeals -- about 62 per cent -- related to violations of the Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Regulations, 2003.

At the same time, the SEBI's "difficult-to-recover" (DTR) dues rose to Rs 77,800 crore in 2024-25, compared to Rs 76,293 crore at the end of March 2024.

These dues remain pending despite extensive recovery efforts. The SEBI clarified that classifying them as DTR is an administrative measure and does not prevent recovery officers from pursuing them if there are changes in circumstances.

--IANS

pk/vd