Touhid Alam vs Securities & Exchange Board Of India And Others

Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer

The appellant has filed the present appeal against the order dated December 28, 2018 passed by the Whole time Member (hereinafter referred to

as ‘WTM’) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) wherein a categorical finding was given

against the appellant to the effect that he had failed to substantiate that his signature was fraudulently obtained or that he had never signed any

document for becoming the promoter of the company in question.

The contention of the appellant is that he had never given his consent to become the promoter of the company nor had signed any document and,

therefore, his signatures were fraudulently obtained. In this regards, he has also filed a report of an handwriting expert which according to the

appellant was not correctly considered by the WTM.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the record, we find that contradictory stand has been taken by the appellant

from time to time.Initially, the appellant contended that his signature was fraudulently obtained and subsequently, it was converted to a forged

signature. In view of this contradictory stand, it is a clear that the stand of the appellant appears to be an afterthought for the purpose of escaping his

liability. The WTM has dwelt on this aspect at length and has also given a finding that the expert report submitted by the appellant is not in accordance

with the directions given in the final order regarding submission of signature verification by an expert recognized or registered or affiliated by the

Government of India which fact has not been disputed before us.

In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the appeal. Dismissed.