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

Order Date: August 12, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Prasanth Raju, filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, on June 17, 2026. The application specifically sought information regarding a SEBI letter dated May 29, 2026, addressed to the National Stock Exchange (NSE). This letter imposed a financial disincentive of ₹6.04 crore on the NSE for a technical glitch that occurred in April 2024. The penalty was related to the NSE's alleged failure to restore normalcy within stipulated timelines for one stock and its failure to submit a complete or final root cause analysis to SEBI in a timely manner.

The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) at SEBI, Mumbai, responded to the application on July 13, 2026, denying the information. The denial was based on exemptions under Sections 8(1)(d) and 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The CPIO argued that the information was highly confidential, contained sensitive details about systemic vulnerabilities, and was held by SEBI in a fiduciary capacity. It was also stated that there was no larger public interest warranting its disclosure. Dissatisfied with this response, the appellant filed a first appeal on July 15, 2026 (Registration No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00254).

The Appellate Authority, Ruchi Chojer, concurred with the CPIO's decision. The authority reasoned that the requested information pertained to the commercial confidence and systemic vulnerabilities of a third party (NSE) and was received by SEBI in a fiduciary relationship. Disclosure was deemed potentially harmful to the competitive position of the market participant. The order cited precedents from the Central Information Commission (CIC), including the cases of Mr. Ashok Kumar Rajak vs. CPIO, SEBI (order dated December 21, 2021) and Mehmood Mehboob Shaikh vs. CPIO, SEBI (decision dated November 11, 2025), which upheld similar denials of investigative reports and notices involving third-party information.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed. The Appellate Authority found no deficiency in the CPIO's response and upheld the denial of information, affirming that it is exempt from disclosure under Sections 8(1)(d) (information including commercial confidence, trade secrets, or intellectual property) and 8(1)(e) (information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship) of the RTI Act, 2005. The practical consequence is that the specific details of SEBI's communication with NSE regarding the penalty and the glitch analysis remain confidential.

Topics: RTI Act, SEBI Enforcement, Market Infrastructure