What governments did, and what it cost the country

What was done

The Joint Parliamentary Committee, chaired by Prakash Mani Tripathi, examined the 2001 stock market manipulation and presented its report to Parliament on 19 December 2002; the Ministry of Finance issued an Action Taken Report on 9 May 2003. SEBI passed an order dated 4 April 2001 debarring Ketan Parekh, Kartik Parekh and connected broking firms from fresh business as stock brokers or merchant bankers. Ketan Parekh was convicted in 2008 for the manipulation, and in January 2025 SEBI banned him from trading and impounded ₹66 crore in a front-running case, as reported by Wikipedia.

What it meant for the country

The record shows harm to market integrity and investor protection: the JPC found regulatory failure and bank wrongdoing contributed to the 2001 manipulation, and SEBI later impounded ₹66 crore and banned Ketan Parekh in a 2025 front-running case.

• The JPC found apathy and failure of regulatory bodies in exercising prudent supervision of stock market and banking transactions. [1]
• The JPC found that wrongdoing by banks contributed significantly towards the manipulation, and that private sector banks need to be closely watched, especially in risk management and stricter regulation. [1]
• SEBI debarred Ketan Parekh, Kartik Parekh and connected broking firms from undertaking fresh business as stock broker or merchant banker from 4 April 2001. [5]
• Ketan Parekh was convicted in 2008 for the manipulation from late 1998 to 2001, as reported by Wikipedia. [4]
• In January 2025, SEBI banned Parekh from trading and impounded ₹66 crore in a front-running case, as reported by Wikipedia. [4]

Step by step

1. 2001
   The Joint Parliamentary Committee was formed with Prakash Mani Tripathi as chair, following the exposure of a stock market manipulation centred around Ketan Parekh. [2]
2. 2001-04-04
   SEBI passed an order against Ketan Parekh, Kartik Parekh and broking firms controlled by or connected with him for prima facie involvement in market manipulation, debarring them from undertaking any fresh business as a stock broker or merchant banker till further orders. [5]
3. 2002-12-19
   The Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Stock Market Scam and Matters Relating Thereto was presented to Parliament. [1]
4. 2003-05-09
   The Government of India, Ministry of Finance, issued the Action Taken Report on the Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Stock Market Scam and Matters Relating Thereto. [1]
5. 2003-12-12
   SEBI issued an order in Sebi vs Ketan V. Parekh, Kartik K. Parekh, and others, recording the 4 April 2001 debarment from fresh business as stock broker or merchant banker. [5]
6. 2008
   Ketan Parekh was convicted for involvement in the Indian stock market manipulation that occurred from late 1998 to 2001, as reported by Wikipedia. [4]
7. 2025-01
   SEBI banned Ketan Parekh from trading after finding his involvement in a front-running case and impounded ₹66 crore, as reported by Wikipedia. [4]

The documents

1. [1] PDF Action Taken Report Official, dea.gov.in
2. [2] Report of the Joint Committee on Stock Market Scam and Matters Relating ... Web, the1991project.com
3. [3] Ketan Parekh Used Overseas Trips As Cloak For Fraudulent Trades, SEBI ... Web, news18.com
4. [4] Ketan Parekh - Wikipedia Web, en.wikipedia.org
5. [5] Sebi vs Ketan V. Parekh, Kartik K. Parekh, ... on 12 December, 2003 Court, indiankanoon.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026

What was done

Parliament enacted the Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002, inserting Article 21A to make free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen a fundamental right, substituting Article 45 to direct early childhood care and education for children below six, and adding Article 51A(k) as a parent or guardian's duty. Parliament later enacted the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 to give effect to Article 21A.

What it meant for the country

The documents record a right secured: free and compulsory education for children aged 6–14 became a fundamental right and was operationalised by the 2009 Act.

• The amendment made elementary education an enforceable legal right rather than a privilege, placing India among a select group of nations that treat elementary education as an enforceable legal right. [10]
• The 2009 Act provides every child the right to free and compulsory education until completion of elementary education in a neighbourhood school. [8]
• The 2005 Right to Education Bill was estimated to cost the exchequer between Rs 3,21,000 crore and Rs 4,36,000 crore over six years in addition to current expenditure on education. [22]

Step by step

1. 1993
   The Supreme Court ruled that the right to education for children up to age 14 is a fundamental right flowing from Article 21 read with Article 45, as reported by PRS. [10][16]
2. 1997
   The Constitution (Eighty-third Amendment) Bill, 1997 was introduced in Parliament to insert Article 21A conferring on all children aged 6 to 14 the right to free and compulsory education. [9][21]
3. 2002-12-12
   Parliament passed the Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002. [6][9][19]
4. 2002-12-13
   The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 was notified and came into force. [13][17]
5. 2005
   The Right to Education Bill, 2005 was introduced to give effect to the 86th Amendment. [16][22]
6. 2009-08-04
   Parliament enacted the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. [8]
7. 2010-04-01
   The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 came into force. [10]

The documents

1. [1] PDF The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act 2002 (As Passed by The ... Official, bombayhighcourt.gov.in
2. [2] Article 21A in Constitution of India - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
3. [3] THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
4. [4] THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
5. [5] Eighty-sixth Amendment of the Constitution of India - Wikipedia Web, en.wikipedia.org
6. [6] PDF THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 [12th December ... Web, righttoeducation.in
7. [7] Article 45: Provision for early childhood care and education to ... Web, constitutionofindia.net
8. [8] Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 Web, en.wikipedia.org
9. [9] Eighty-Sixth Amendment · Amendment · Constitution of India Web, coi.philoid.app
10. [10] The Evolution and Impact of the Right to Education Act (RTE) 2009 Web, teachers.institute
11. [11] Section 2 in THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
12. [12] Section 21A in Constitution of India, 1950 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
13. [13] English Releases - Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
14. [14] PDF 40LS.p65 - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org
15. [15] PDF Microsoft Word - 1. Chapter - 1 - Comptroller and Auditor General of India Official, cag.gov.in
16. [16] PDF bill brief 5 - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org
17. [17] English Releases - Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
18. [18] Section 4 in THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
19. [19] PDF THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002 [12th December ... Research, prsindia.org
20. [20] PDF Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 Official, childsafety.cgpolice.gov.in
21. [21] PDF The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 Official, legislative.gov.in
22. [22] The Right to Education Bill, 2005 - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026

What was done

Parliament passed the Freedom of Information Act, 2002, which gave citizens a right to obtain information from public authorities by inspection, taking extracts and notes, getting certified copies, or getting electronic copies such as diskettes and print-outs. It required every public authority to appoint one or more Public Information Officers to deal with requests for information and give reasonable assistance. The Act was later repealed — cancelled — by Act 22 of 2005, the Right to Information Act, 2005, which took its place.

What it meant for the country

The documents record the creation, and then the replacement, of a citizen's statutory right to access public records, with the stated aim of promoting openness and transparency in government; the right now stands under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

• Citizens gained a statutory right — "all citizens shall have freedom of information" — to obtain records of public authorities by inspection, extracts and notes, certified copies, or electronic means such as diskettes and print-outs. [3][5]
• The parliamentary debate recorded the expectation that making information freely available "would result in ensuring a more responsive Government". [8]
• The law was replaced by the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act 22 of 2005), so the citizen's right of access to public information now operates under that later law. [12]

Step by step

1. 2000
   Parliament held further discussion on the Freedom of Information Bill. Members said the measure rested on Article 19 of the Constitution, argued it should be called the Right to Information Bill rather than the Freedom of Information Bill, and one member said a close study showed it was "more for public consumption than for public enforcement". [8]
2. 2000-07-25
   The Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 was introduced in Parliament to allow disclosure of information by the Central Government, State Governments and other public authorities specified in the Bill. [6]
3. 2003-01-06
   The President signed the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 into law as Act 5 of 2003, described as "An Act to provide for freedom to every citizen to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, consistent with public interest, in order to promote openness, transparency and accountability". [12]
4. 2005
   The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 was repealed by Act 22 of 2005 — the Right to Information Act, 2005 — with effect on the 120th day after 15 June 2005. [12]

The documents

1. [1] Section 1 in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
2. [2] Section 1 in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
3. [3] Section 3 in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
4. [4] Section 5 in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
5. [5] Section 2 in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
6. [6] Introduction Of The Freedom Of Information Bill, 2000. on 25 ... Court, indiankanoon.org
7. [7] Regarding Passing Of The Bills By The Houses Of Parliament ... Court, indiankanoon.org
8. [8] Further Discussion On The Freedom Of Information Bill. 2000 ... Court, indiankanoon.org
9. [9] President’S Address To Both Houses Of Parliament Assembled ... Court, indiankanoon.org
10. [10] Section 20 (1) in The Freedom Of Information Act, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
11. [11] Section 2 (a) (i) in The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
12. [12] Welcome to High Court of Tripura Official, thc.nic.in

Compiled from the documents cited, 12 Oct 2026

What was done

The Government of India enacted the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and notified rules under it with effect from 1 July 2005. It set up Financial Intelligence Unit-India in the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance by office memorandum dated 18 November 2004, and conferred exclusive and concurrent implementation powers on the Director, FIU-IND and Director (Enforcement).

What it meant for the country

The cited sources establish the statutory framework and some FIU-IND compliance notices, but they do not record measurable national consequences such as loss figures, convictions or rights outcomes.

• FIU-IND is the central national agency for receiving, processing, analysing and disseminating information relating to suspect financial transactions. [1]
• The PMLA and rules impose obligations on banking companies, financial institutions, intermediaries and persons carrying on a designated business or profession to verify client identity, maintain records and furnish information to FIU-IND. [2]
• The Director, FIU-IND issued notices for non-compliance to fifteen Virtual Digital Assets Service Providers under Section 13 of the PMLA. [6]
• FIU-IND issued notices for non-compliance to 25 offshore Virtual Digital Assets Service Providers under Section 13 of the PMLA. [7]

Step by step

1. 2004-11-18
   Financial Intelligence Unit-India was set up by the Government of India in the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, by office memorandum dated 18 November 2004. [1]
2. 2005-07-01
   The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the rules notified under it came into force with effect from 1 July 2005. [2]
3. 2005-07-01
   The Prevention of Money-Laundering (Forms, Search and Seizure and the Manner of Forwarding the Reasons and Material to the Adjudicating Authority, Impounding and Custody of Records and the Period of Retention) Rules, 2005 were published vide Notification G.S.R. 445(E), dated 1 July 2005. [5]

The documents

1. [1] Finance Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND) | DOR Official, dor.gov.in
2. [2] Pmla | Dor Official, dor.gov.in
3. [3] PMLA 2002: Understanding the Enforcement Directorate's Powers of ... Web, sansalegal.com
4. [4] PMLA Powers: Survey, Search, Seizure & Arrest Explained (Sections 16-24 ... Web, vidhoon.com
5. [5] The Prevention Of Money-Laundering (Forms, Search And Seizure And The ... Court, indiankanoon.org
6. [6] Press Release Page | Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
7. [7] Press Release Page | Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
8. [8] Section 73 in The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 Court, indiankanoon.org
9. [9] PDF 80 - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026