AMTEX LIMITED vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2026 CLD 9 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation: 2026 CLD 9 ISLAMABAD
Court: Islamabad High Court
Year: 2026
Reporter: CLD
Parties: AMTEX LIMITED vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Ss
Subject matter: Constitutional
Provisions referred to: S. 265; Companies Ordinance

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

AMTEX LIMITED VS SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 263 & 265---Investigation of company's affairs---Affording opportunities to Company---Appointment of inspector---Scope---Petitioner/Company assailed order of appointment of appointment of inspector into its affairs---Argument of the petitioner/ Company was that such intrusive proceedings damaged the Petitioner's reputation---Validity---The appointment of an inspector does not tarnish the Company's reputation, which cannot be a ground to defeat the statutory scheme of investigation designed to ensure transparency in corporate affairs and the company itself should have no reluctance in joining the investigation, if it can explain and answer the questions raised by the SECP---Thus, the appointment of investigators likely to affect the reputation of the company can hardly be a ground for rendering redundant the provisions of S. 265 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984---Applying said reasoning in the present case, the petitioner / Company, having been confronted with material discrepancies in its disclosures, could not evade lawful investigation merely by alleging reputational harm or procedural impropriety---Thus, the respondents had acted within their lawful authority under Ss. 263 & 265 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984---The opinion formed was supported by relevant material and did not suffer from arbitrariness or mala fide intent---The petitioner, instead of fully complying with the directions, provided inconsistent information, thereby inviting a legitimate inquiry---The appointment of an Inspector is neither punitive nor final, but merely facilitates the collection of evidence by an independent functionary---Constitutional petition, being merit-less, was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLD

2026 CLD 745 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANSALAAM TAKAFUL LIMITED VS DIRECTOR/HOD, ADJUDICATION DEPARTMENT-I, SECP, ISLAMABAD. Ss. 11(1)(b) & 29(2)(a)---Insurance company---Minimum st…
2026 CLD 704 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANFLOAT SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER (SMD). Reglns. 4(d), 16(9)(e) & 18( c ) (ii)---Maintaining independent audit function, fail…
2026 CLD 677 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANNEXT CAPITAL LIMITED VS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ADJUDICATION DEPARTMENT-I, SECP. Reglns. 6(3)(a), 6(3)(c), 6(4), 6(8), 4(a) & 13(7)---Requiremen…
2026 CLD 638 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANFIRST NATIONAL EQUITIES LIMITED VS DIRECTOR/HOD, ADJUDICATION-I. Reglns. 11, 13, 31 & annex. 1---anti-Money Laundering act (VII of 2010), Ss…
2026 CLD 528 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANCEDAR CAPITAL (PRIVATE) LIMITED (CCPL) VS COMMISSIONER, SMD, SECP. Ss. 15a & 15B---Right issue---Scope---Underwriting---Scope---Trading / pu…
2026 CLD 505 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTANKASHF FOUNDATION VS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ADJUDICATION. Reglns. 6(5)(a), 6(3)(a), 6(4), 6(8) & 13(7)---Anti-Money laundering regulatory require…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English