On 26 April 2013, a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court upheld SEBI's market-access debarment and ₹50 lakh adjudicating-officer penalty against a whole-time director of Pyramid Saimira Theatre Ltd. for fraudulent misstatement of financial results under Section 12A of the SEBI Act and the PFUTP Regulations. Directors closely associated with management, the Court held, cannot 'shut their eyes to what must be obvious to everyone' — red flags in revenues, profits, receivables and deposits engage an affirmative duty of inquiry, and passivity is not a defence. The judgment is the foundational SC authority on whole-time-director liability for company-level securities fraud; the proposition has often been read more broadly than the case decides.
On 17 March 2026 a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court (J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan JJ., judgment authored by Viswanathan J.) held that the use-of-proceeds objects disclosed by an issuer for a preferential issue are market-facing regulatory commitments under the SEBI (ICDR) Regulations 2009, and that post-allotment diversion of those proceeds constitutes fraud under the PFUTP Regulations 2003 — not curable by a subsequent shareholder ratification resolution or by an alteration of the Memorandum of Association. The Court separately confirmed that proceedings under sections 11 and 11B of the SEBI Act 1992 by the Whole-Time Member and adjudication under section 15HA by the Adjudicating Officer occupy distinct preventive and punitive spheres, and may be pursued in parallel.