A Division Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja held that the NSE performs functions in which the public has a significant interest and that its Managing Director and CEO cannot be detached from those responsibilities. The court, therefore, found no merit in Ramkrishna’s challenge to the definitions of “public duty” and “public servant” under the anti-corruption law.
The Bench observed that the statutory definition of a public servant is sufficiently clear and applies to individuals who occupy an office that empowers them to discharge duties affecting the State or the public. It said the law requires courts to assess, on a case-by-case basis, whether the person concerned satisfies these conditions, rejecting the argument that the provision is vague or unconstitutional.
The High Court also turned down Ramkrishna’s contention that the sanction granted to prosecute her under the PC Act was legally invalid.
Ramkrishna had questioned the constitutional validity of Sections 2(b) and 2(c)(viii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Section 2(b) defines a public duty as one in which the State, the public or the community has an interest, while Section 2(c)(viii) includes within the definition of a public servant any person who holds an office requiring or authorising the discharge of such a duty.
The case forms part of the CBI’s investigation into the alleged NSE co-location scam. Ramkrishna has been accused of irregularly revising the designation and remuneration of former NSE executive Anand Subramanian, allegedly granting him disproportionate benefits.
The allegations stem from a SEBI order issued on February 11, which concluded that Ramkrishna was involved in irregular decisions relating to Subramanian’s appointment and compensation. Investigators have also alleged that she took guidance from a so-called “Siddha Purusha” through email communications, whom the CBI claims was in fact Subramanian.
According to the CBI, the accused entered into a criminal conspiracy that conferred undue advantages on certain trading members and brokers, resulting in a serious economic offence affecting the interests of investors.
