NSE Scam: PC Act case against Chitra Ramkrishna to proceed after Delhi HC rejects challenge to definitions of public duty, public servant

The Delhi High Court on Thursday rejected the plea filed by Chitra Ramkrishna, the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), challenging the definitions of ‘public duty’ and ‘public servant’ under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). .A Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja ruled that the NSE performs a public duty and Ramkrishna, being its Managing Director (MD) and CEO, cannot be wholly separated from the functions performed by the NSE in which the public at large is interested.“Keeping in view the above object of the PC Act, we do not find any vagueness in the definition of “public servant” as defined in Section 2(c)(viii) read with Section 2(b) of the PC Act," the Court held. It explained that the provision is specific and "applies to a person who holds an office by virtue of which he is empowered to perform a public duty, that is, a duty in the discharge of which the State, the public or the community at large has an interest". "It has two specific preconditions: (i) holding of an office; and (ii) performance of a public duty by virtue of such office. It would have to be determined in each case whether the person, who has been charged under the PC Act, meets the above two preconditions. However, merely because every such 'office' has not been mentioned in Section 2(c) of the PC Act, the said provision cannot be termed as vague or uncertain, so as to be violative of Articles 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India," the Court said. The Court also rejected Ramkrishna's submission that the PC Act sanction granted for Ramkrishna's prosecution was invalid..Ramkrishna had challenged Sections 2(b) and 2(c)(viii) of the PC Act.Section 2(b) defines public duty as the “duty in the discharge of which the State, the public or the community at large has an interest." Section 2(c)(viii) says that a public servant includes any person “who holds an office by virtue of which he is authorised or required to perform any public duty.”.Ramkrishna is an accused in the alleged NSE co-location scam case. She has been accused of frequently revising the designation and compensation of former NSE employee, Anand Subramanian..The case against Ramkrishna stems from a February 11 order of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) which found that Ramakrishna had allegedly been involved in financial misdeeds relating to fixation and frequent revision of compensation of another former NSE employee, Anand Subramanian in a disproportionate manner. She is alleged to have done this in cahoots with someone whom she claimed to be a “Siddha Purusha."The CBI said that Subramanian, while performing a public duty to protect the interest of common investors, indulged in criminal conspiracy with other co-accused and caused a huge advantage to various trading members/brokers. Thus, she committed a serious economic offence, the CBI alleged. The other allegation against Ramkrishna was that she was in touch through e-mails with a Himalayan Yogi who the CBI later claimed to be none other than Subramanian..Senior Advocate N Hariharan with advocates Rony John, Shivam Batra, Arshdeep Singh, Arpita Bhardwaj, Abhishek Bhushan, Mohd Ibrahim, Amaan Shreyas, Punya Rekha Angara, Aman Akhtar, Vasundhara N, Sana Singh, Vasundhara Raj Tyagi, Arjan Singh Mandla, Prateek Bhalla and Mallika Chadha appeared for Chitra Ramkrishna. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma, Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Amit Tiwari with advocates Chetanya Puri, Ayushi Srivastava, Arpan Narwal, Kushagra Malik and Ujjwal Tyagi represented the Union of India. CBI was represented through Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Anupam S Sharrma as well as advocates Harpreet Kalsi, Vashisht Rao, Amisha P Dash, Abhiyant Singh, Mayank Tyagi, Pragati Ojha and Pragya Nath. .[Read Judgement]