Authority: Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005, Securities and Exchange Board of India

Order Date: November 06, 2026

Case Overview

The appeal was filed by Vikram Aggarwal against the CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai regarding an RTI application dated September 17, 2026. The appellant sought extensive documentation related to the IPO process of National Stock Exchange of India Limited (NSE), specifically concerning the DRHP dated June 17, 2026, public comment process, RHP dated September 10, 2026, and representations regarding DBS Capital Markets Pvt Ltd's disabled trading member status and related security deposit refund issues. The appellant referenced the RHP statement that NSE and BRLMs received 25 complaints, including one category concerning refund of security deposit due to disabling of an entity as a trading member.

The appellant requested 10 specific items: (1) Regulation 26 filing schedule matrix or public comment records, (2) records of representation dated June 22, 2026, (3) correspondence between SEBI and NSE/BRLMs regarding the representation, (4) SEBI queries concerning complaints received between DRHP and RHP, (5) records identifying the 25 complaints, (6) records identifying complaints under the security deposit refund category, (7) records showing whether this category influenced additional disclosures, (8) records supporting the RHP statement of no material financial impact from complaints, (9) records concerning the duration of DBS Capital Markets' disabled member status, and (10) copy of SEBI's final approval communication for the offer.

SEBI's CPIO denied information for queries 1-4 and 10 under Sections 8(1)(d) and 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, stating the information was held in fiduciary capacity and contained commercially confidential information. For query 8, SEBI stated the information was not available. For queries 5, 6, 7, and 9, SEBI deemed the queries vague and not specific enough to qualify as 'information' under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.

The Appellate Authority upheld SEBI's position, citing Supreme Court precedents (Institute of Chartered Accountants of India Vs. Shaunak H. Satya and Ors; Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors) and CIC decisions (Mr. Ashok Kumar Rajak vs. CPIO, SEBI; Mr. T. V. Sundaresan vs. CPIO, SEBI) that established: (1) information received from third parties in fiduciary relationship is exempt from disclosure, (2) public authorities are not obligated to create or collate non-available information, and (3) information sought must be specific and available in documented form.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed, upholding SEBI's decision to deny the requested information. The Appellate Authority found no deficiency in SEBI's response and determined there was no need to interfere with the CPIO's decision.

Topics: RTI Exemptions, IPO Disclosure, Regulatory Confidentiality