sebi:AO/PKN/1/2019
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalty imposed on the Noticees for contravention of PFUTP Regulations; total penalty of ₹14,48,18,966 imposed against ill-gotten gains of ₹7,24,09,483
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 45
Regulations
- Reg. 3(a)
Parties
- Chiranjilal Vyas (Noticee No.1)
- Namdeo H. More (Noticee No.2)
- Kishore B. Giri (Noticee No.3)
- Deendayal Bohara (Noticee No.4)
- Kishorilal Bissa (Noticee No.5)
Holding
The Noticees were held liable for creating a misleading appearance of trading in the securities market and inflating the price of the Sunteck scrip through off-market transfers to front entities who then sold shares on the exchange, constituting contravention of Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(b) of the PFUTP Regulations, and penalties totaling ₹14,48,18,966 (twice the ill-gotten gains of ₹7,24,09,483) were imposed.
Full text
Page 2 of 29 themselves. They transferred shares through off-market route to a large number of other entities, who then sold the shares in the market so as to give an impression of widespread trading in the scrip of Sunteck. This contributed significantly to the market volume as well as price rise in the scrip of Sunteck during the period of Investigation. The contribution to the market volume of this group was 78.09% in February, 2007, 80.37% in April, 2007, 79.84% in May, 2007 and 77.8% in July, 2007.
Page 3 of 29 that the Noticees are connected with each other by way of fund transfers, off- market transfer of shares, phone calls, text messages etc. that the Noticees made unjust enrichment that the Noticees allegedly violated the provisions of Regulations 3(a), (b), 4(2)(a) and (b) of PFUTP Regulations in respect of their dealings in the scrip of Sunteck.
Page 4 of 29 Chiranjilal Vyas/ Noticee No.1 Vide letter dated June 18, 2013, an opportunity of personal hearing was granted to Noticee No.1 on July 09, 2013. In the said letter, the reference of opportunity of personal hearing earlier granted to him was also made. It was also mentioned that the SCN alleges that he is guilty of creating misleading appearance of trading in the securities market and inflating the price of the scrip and based on his transactions in the shares of Sunteck, he made an unjust enrichment of ₹3.52 crore. However, he did not attend the said hearing. Another opportunity of personal hearing was granted to him on August 28, 2014 vide letter dated August 19, 2014. However, he requested for adjournment of hearing for a period of two weeks vide letter dated August 26, 2014.
You have read the preview. Create a free account to read the full order, track this party, and analyse it in Ontology.
Free accounts include 10 searches/day with full order access.
Source: SecMarx — sebi:AO/PKN/1/2019. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (bench, timelines, appeal chain) is cited to us.