How NSE's Former Boss Ravi Narain Won Respite In Illegal Phone Tapping Cases
The failure of India's premier investigating agencies the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to move higher courts against the bail granted to Ravi Narain, the former boss of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), is raising eyebrows in the legal circles.
In a rare instance, Narain was granted bail in 'two cases filed by two different investigating agencies in a single order' by New Delhi's Special Judge Sunena Sharma. The judge granted bail to Narain on humanitarian grounds in a single order for one case filed against him by CBI and another by the ED. The bail was granted a year ago on November 7, 2022, but neither CBI nor ED has challenged the bail order so far in the higher courts.
Narain was accused in a CBI case regarding illegal interception/monitoring of telephone calls of NSE employees for which a third-party vendor was engaged. The case against Narain and other accused involved in the alleged phone tapping was registered by CBI under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) read with section 420 IPC Section (Fraud) 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of PC Act and Section 72 of Information Technology Act.
Separately, the ED had registered a case against Narain and others under the sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The court order states that the telephone numbers to be monitored were identified by the co-accused Chitra Ramkrishna, Narain's deputy at NSE, and conveyed to Ravi Varanasi, Vice President, NSE. Varanasi inturn provided the numbers to the same to Mahesh Haldipur, Head (Premises), who gave it to a company called iSec, which is also accused of tapping the NSE employee phones. The identified officers / departments included Market Watch, Market Surveillance, Risk Management, which had access to NSE's critical online information and access to online real time databases, the order notes. The machines used for illegal monitoring/interception between 2007 to 2017 were sold as e-waste scrap by NSE in 2019. Narain was NSE's MD and CEO for nearly two decades upto 2013.
With regard to Narain's role, the court order notes that it was alleged that he introduced iSec boss Sanjay Pandey to co-accused Ramakrishna. Also, the court order says that Narain was part of NSE's decision making process and he had knowledge of monitoring / recording / interception of telephone calls of NSE employees.
The court granted bail to Narain on 'humanitarian grounds' on the reasoning that he was the sole care-giver to his wife, who is suffering from Stage 4 Breast Cancer and requires constant treatment and support while his two daughters were ensconced in the UK. His lawyers also argued that he had no knowledge about no technological or IT expertise and had no role in alleged phone-tapping and the logistics relating to alleged tapping such as installation of hardware etc. or in the running of the entire operation. On the point of technical expertise, many legal experts point out it would not cut much ice since Narain headed NSE, India's most high-tech exchange for a good two decades.
"Applicant (Narain) is no doubt also old and ailing but his health condition is far better than the health condition of his wife and it cannot be said that he is not in a position to provide care to his wife with his present conditions of health. Even otherwise, it is the moral, social and legal obligation of the husband to take care of his wife during his lifetime," Judge Sharma noted in her order granting bail to Narain.
The failure of India's premier investigating agencies the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to move higher courts against the bail granted to Ravi Narain, the former boss of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), is raising eyebrows in the legal circles.
In a rare instance, Narain was granted bail in 'two cases filed by two different investigating agencies in a single order' by New Delhi's Special Judge Sunena Sharma. The judge granted bail to Narain on humanitarian grounds in a single order for one case filed against him by CBI and another by the ED. The bail was granted a year ago on November 7, 2022 but neither CBI nor ED has challenged the bail order so far in the higher courts.
Narain was accused in a CBI case regarding illegal interception/monitoring of telephone calls of NSE employees for which a third-party vendor was engaged. The case against Narain and other accused involved in the alleged phone tapping was registered by CBI under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) read with section 420 IPC Section (Fraud) 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of PC Act and Section 72 of Information Technology Act.
Separately, the ED had registered a case against Narain and others under the sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The court order states that the telephone numbers to be monitored were identified by the co-accused Chitra Ramkrishna, Narain's deputy at NSE, and conveyed to Ravi Varanasi, Vice President, NSE. Varanasi in turn provided the numbers to the same to Mahesh Haldipur, Head (Premises), who gave it to a company called iSec, which is also accused of tapping the NSE employee phones. The identified officers/departments included Market Watch, Market Surveillance, Risk Management, which had access to NSE's critical online information and access to online real-time databases, the order notes. The machines used for illegal monitoring/interception between 2007 to 2017 were sold as e-waste scrap by NSE in 2019. Narain was NSE's MD and CEO for nearly two decades up to 2013.
With regard to Narain's role, the court order notes that it was alleged that he introduced iSec boss Sanjay Pandey to co-accused Ramakrishna. Also, the court order says that Narain was part of NSE's decision-making process and he had knowledge of monitoring/recording/interception of telephone calls of NSE employees.
The court granted bail to Narain on 'humanitarian grounds' on the reasoning that he was the sole caregiver to his wife, who is suffering from Stage 4 Breast Cancer and requires constant treatment and support while his two daughters were ensconced in the UK. His lawyers also argued that he had no knowledge about no technological or IT expertise and had no role in alleged phone-tapping and the logistics relating to alleged tapping such as installation of hardware etc. or in the running of the entire operation. On the point of technical expertise, many legal experts point out it would not cut much ice since Narain headed NSE, India's most high-tech exchange for a good two decades.
"Applicant (Narain) is no doubt also old and ailing but his health condition is far better than the health condition of his wife and it cannot be said that he is not in a position to provide care to his wife with his present conditions of health. Even otherwise, it is the moral, social and legal obligation of the husband to take care of his wife during his lifetime," Judge Sharma noted in her order granting bail to Narain.
_20240511161025original_image_14.webp)
