The order says Ramakrishna was found passing critical and internal “confidential” information about the functioning of NSE to an “unknown” yogi. Ramakrishna herself told SEBI on April 14, 2018 that this yogi “is the Siddha Purusha/Yogi i.e., a Paramahansa who maybe largely dwelling in the Himalayan ranges”. The information passed to this “unknown person”, through numerous emails mentioned in the order, relate to “organisational structure (of NSE), dividend scenario, financial results, human resources policy and related issues, response to regulator etc.” and also NSE’s “5-year financial projections... NSE’s business plans, agenda of NSE’s board meeting and consultations over the ratings/performance appraisals of NSE employees”.

Its order also notes that this “unknown person” had “significantly influenced the decision making” by Ramakrishna during her tenure as the NSE MD and CEO. It does surmise that the “unknown person” is none other than Anand Subramanian, her close associate by citing the mails and forensic findings by the Ernst & Young in 2018. The order also points out that Subramanian was appointed by her to key positions at “an exorbitantly higher compensation/salary package” even though he had “no relevant experience for the position he was being appointed”.

Yet, the SEBI order remains vague about the Himalayan yogi’s identity, doesn’t find out his motives, or prosecute him. Not even an FIR was lodged with police (cyber cell) to reveal the real person/persons behind the “unknown person”. A simple FIR and interrogation of Ramakrishna by police would have revealed the identity and what was the intended use of the critical information she passed on. It doesn’t find major problems with Ramakrishna’s unprofessional, and even criminal, misconduct and the gross failures of the NSE to check and take effective counter measures for several years. The penalties imposed on Ramakrishna and NSE are minor and restraints put on the former seemingly disproportionate to the professional misconduct as detailed by Fortune India earlier (“SEBI order in NSE's Chitra Ramkrishna case is a job half done”).

It would be naïve to assume that Ramakrishna’s misconduct was a case of individual eccentricity or deviant behaviour that frequent references to “psychology report”, “psychology expert” in SEBI’s order may suggest. Rather, it is more logical to assume the involvement of politically powerful individuals and the murky affairs in the largest stock exchange and the top market regulator.

Going by the facts mentioned in connection of both the cases, it is SEBI which comes out in a very poor light. It neither gives the impression of being independent of political influence or effective in providing the checks and balances. It is a gigantic institutional failure that should cause immense concern.

Top regulators like SEBI and NSE must be independent, and guided by professionalism, relying on expert views instead of “unknown” yogi from the Himalayas. Else, it is difficult to imagine India emerging as an economic superpower and the business destination for global capital and technologies.

corporate governance rules

Topping Corporate Governance Charts

SEBI’s stunning about-turn