sebi:ERO/OFL/PD/AO/DRK/AS/EAD-3/132/09-34/2010
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 violations of SEBI PFUTP Regulations, 2003 and SEBI Act, 1992
Provisions invoked
- s. 11
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
- s. 12
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 6
- Reg. 8(1)(a)
Parties
- Shri Pintu Dey
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer held that Shri Pintu Dey violated Regulation 3, 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), 4(2)(e), 4(2)(g), 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(b) of the SEBI PFUTP Regulations, 2003 and Section 11(C)(2) read with Sections 11(C)(3) and 11(C)(5) of the SEBI Act, 1992, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- under Sections 15HA and 15A of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Page 2 of 11 stock brokers for their own transactions but have also had matching transactions among themselves. It appeared from the trading pattern of each of the stock brokers with their clients that simultaneous buy and sell orders of same quantity and same price in the scrip have been placed either by the clients or in the name of the clients by the stock brokers themselves.
Page 3 of 11 SEBI Act, 1992 for violating the provisions of Regulation 3, 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), 4(2)(e), 4(2)(g), 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(b) of SEBI PFTUP Regulations and section 11(C)(2) read with Section 11(C)(3) and Section 11(C)(5) of SEBI Act. The SCN stated that the reply shall reach within 15 days from date of receipt of the notice, failing which it shall be presumed that the noticee has no reply to submit and the matter shall be proceeded on the basis of material available on record. However, the aforesaid show cause notice sent through Registered Post Acknowledgment Due was returned undelivered with the remark ‘not known’. Thereafter a letter dated June 24, 2009 was sent to his Stock Broker ACL to serve the aforesaid SCN to the noticee, however the Stock Broker vide its letter dated July 07, 2009 replied that it was “unable to deliver” the SCN to the noticee. In the meanwhile, during one of the personal hearings of the Stock Broker held in Eastern Regional Office of Securities and Exchange Board of India at Kolkata on October 13, 2009, it was impressed upon the Stock Broker the importance of serving the SCN to its clients for further proceedings. Accordingly, vide another letter dated November 05, 2009 the Stock Broker (ACL) was once again advised to serve/hand deliver the SCN to the noticee. In response to the said letter the Stock Broker vide its letter dated November 18, 2009 informed that it made several attempts to serve the aforesaid show cause notice to the noticee
Page 4 of 11 Office SEBI affixed the show cause notice and the hearing notice under Rule 7 of the Rules on the premises of the noticee and the report of affixture is on record. However the noticee failed to attend the personal hearing without furnishing any reasons.
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:ERO/OFL/PD/AO/DRK/AS/EAD-3/132/09-34/2010. 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.