sebi:EAD-7/BJD/NJMR/2018-19/1465

SEBI · SEBI · B J Dilip, Adjudicating Officer

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 Noticee for violation of SEBI (PFUTP) Regulations, 2003

Provisions invoked

• s. 15
• s. 19
• s. 15H
• s. 15I
• s. 15J
• s. 15I(1)

Regulations

• Reg. 3
• Reg. 4
• Reg. 2(1)(c)
• Reg. 3(a)

Parties

• Prakashchandra Chunilalji Jagawat

Holding

The Noticee violated Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1) and 4(2)(a) of SEBI (PFUTP) Regulations, 2003 by executing 28 non-genuine reversal trades in 6 stock option contracts on BSE, creating artificial volume and a false or misleading appearance of trading, and a penalty of ₹5,00,000 was imposed under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act, 1992.

Full text

Adjudication Order in respect of Prakashchandra Chunilalji Jagawat Page 2 of 26 one of the various entities who were indulged in execution of non-genuine trades in Stock Options Segment of BSE during the investigation period. The following points narrate the dealings of the Noticee during the investigation period and the allegations against it for execution of non-genuine trades.

Adjudication Order in respect of Prakashchandra Chunilalji Jagawat Page 3 of 26 a) The Noticee had executed non genuine trades in 6 contracts, wherein all the trades were non genuine trades. b) The number of non-genuine trades of the Noticee had significantly contributed to the total number of trades from the market in the above contracts, as a substantial 4% to 33% of the trades that happened in the aforementioned contracts were due to non-genuine trades executed by the Noticee. c) A substantial 5% to 53% of volumes generated by the Noticee in each of the above contracts were artificial volume, and further artificial volume generated by him also contributed to significant contribution of the total volume from the market in said contracts. d) Non genuine trades executed by the Noticee in above contracts had significant differential in buy rates and sell rates considering that the trades were reversed on same day.

Adjudication Order in respect of Prakashchandra Chunilalji Jagawat Page 4 of 26 impose such penalty as deemed fit in terms of Rule 5 of SEBI Adjudication Rules 1995 and Section 15HA of SEBI Act.

Source: SecMarx — sebi:EAD-7/BJD/NJMR/2018-19/1465. 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.