Authority: Appellate Authority under the RTI Act, Securities and Exchange Board of India

Order Date: September 17, 2026

Case Overview

The appeal was filed by Brijesh Sharma against the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of SEBI, Mumbai. The appellant had filed an RTI application on July 09, 2026, seeking extensive certified copies of documents related to the settlement proceedings of JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (Settlement Application No. 8617/2025). The specific information requested included the settlement application itself, minutes of all internal SEBI committee meetings (including an Internal Committee meeting on October 16, 2025, and the High Powered Advisory Committee meeting on December 19, 2025), all correspondence between SEBI and the bank, investigation records relied upon by SEBI (specifically regarding 64 purchase transactions between November 1, 2024, and December 9, 2024), and proof of remittance of the settlement amount.

The respondent (SEBI CPIO) denied the request in a letter dated July 31, 2026. SEBI's refusal was based on two primary grounds under the RTI Act, 2005. First, under Section 8(1)(e), SEBI argued that all information submitted and discussions held during settlement proceedings are deemed to be received in a fiduciary capacity, as per Regulation 29 of the SEBI (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018. Disclosure was denied on the basis that it would prejudice the applicant (JP Morgan) in the settlement proceedings and that no larger public interest warranted overriding this exemption. Second, under Section 8(1)(j), SEBI contended that the information constituted personal information of third parties and was exempt from disclosure.

The Appellate Authority, in its reasoning, concurred with the respondent. It upheld the application of Section 8(1)(e), heavily relying on precedent from the Central Information Commission (CIC). The order cited the CIC's decision in Shri Mahendra Singh vs. CPIO, SEBI (August 25, 2011), which held that compelling disclosure of consent application details would collapse the entire settlement mechanism as it is based on trust and a pledge of confidentiality. It also referenced the CIC's order in Arun Kumar Agrawal vs. CPIO, SEBI (August 04, 2020), which affirmed this position. The Authority also upheld the application of Section 8(1)(j), referencing a judgment from the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in CPIO, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal to define the broad scope of 'personal information' that is protected from disclosure.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed. The Appellate Authority found no reason to interfere with the CPIO's decision, thereby upholding the denial of all requested information related to JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.'s settlement proceedings. The Authority did, however, note that the final settlement order itself is publicly available on SEBI's website.

Topics: RTI Act, SEBI Settlement Mechanism, Confidentiality