sebi:EAD-8/JS/SP/104/2017-18

SEBI · SEBI · 2017-12-04 · Jeevan Sonparote, 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

Violations established; penalty imposed under Section 15HB of SEBI Act and Section 23D of SCRA

Provisions invoked

• s. 15
• s. 12
• s. 15H
• s. 15J
• s. 23J
• s. 23
• s. 23D
• s. 23I

Regulations

• Reg. 7
• Reg. 6
• Reg. 9

Parties

• Vishal Vijay Shah

Holding

The Noticee Vishal Vijay Shah was found to have violated the provisions of the SEBI (Stock Brokers & Sub-brokers) Regulations, 1992 and applicable SEBI/BSE circulars by misutilising client funds, accepting payments from third parties, and transferring client securities to non-clients, attracting penalty under Section 15HB of the SEBI Act and Section 23D of SCRA.

Full text

Adjudication Order in the matter of Vishal Vijay Shah – Noticee Vishal Vijay Shah, Stock Broker Page 2 of 20 read with Section 23I of SCRA was issued on August 31, 2017 to Vishal Vijay calling upon the noticee to show cause as to why an inquiry should not be held against it under Rule 4 of the SEBI Adjudication Rules and Rule 4 of SCRA Adjudication Rules and penalty be not imposed for the alleged violation.

Adjudication Order in the matter of Vishal Vijay Shah – Noticee Vishal Vijay Shah, Stock Broker Page 3 of 20 Officer on January 15, 2018 and was under consideration, in the meanwhile the noticee called on telephone to state that he would appear for the hearing.

Adjudication Order in the matter of Vishal Vijay Shah – Noticee Vishal Vijay Shah, Stock Broker Page 4 of 20 does not prove us of dealing in cash or misutilisation of client funds there has been a deposit of 2500/- also so kindly take this matter leniently g. In the matter between Sunil Kothari and Saurabh Nagarseth the trade of sterlite indus was made for Saurabh nagarseth by mistake the trade went into Sunil Kothari a/c it was and error which was confirmed to BSE also Delivery of Shares h. Our clients were regular traders with us some times they used to buy shares for a very short period of time they used to request us to keep the delivery in our a/c so it could be easier for him to trade as well transfer of shares. Share were kept in our beneficiary a/c with there request and on there knowledge. Transfer to Non Clients i. This was done on clients request and we taken specific letter j. As you would see in observation there are only 5-6 instances in which this thing has happened we assure you this would not be repeated even once in the future. k. Lastly we would just request the good self to here our plead and not to pass an ex party order just for being one day late.

Source: SecMarx — sebi:EAD-8/JS/SP/104/2017-18. 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.