sebi:Order/BM/DS/2021-22/14711
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violation established; penalty of ₹5,00,000 imposed under section 15HA of the SEBI Act, 1992
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 11
- s. 15
- s. 19
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
Regulations
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(1)
- Reg. 3(a)
Parties
- Rajesh Agarwal
Holding
The Noticee violated Regulations 3(a), (b), (c), (d), 4(1) and 4(2)(a) of the PFUTP Regulations, 2003 by executing non-genuine reversal trades in an illiquid stock options contract on BSE that created artificial volume, and a penalty of ₹5,00,000 was imposed under section 15HA of the SEBI Act, 1992.
Full text
Page 2 of 23 various entities who indulged in execution of reversal trades in stock options segment of BSE during the IP. Such trades were observed to be non-genuine in nature and created false or misleading appearance of trading in terms of artificial volumes in stock options and therefore were alleged to be manipulative, deceptive in nature. In view of the same, SEBI initiated adjudication proceedings against the Noticee for violation of the provisions of Regulations 3(a), (b), (c), (d), 4(1) and 4(2)(a) of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “PFUTP Regulations, 2003”).
Page 3 of 23 volume of total 14,000 units. Summary of dealings of the Noticee in the said Options contracts, in which the Noticee allegedly executed non-genuine trades during the I.P, is as follows:
Page 4 of 23 7. The SCN with reference no. SEBI/HO/EAD/EAD- 3/BM/DS/OW/2021/29811/1 was served on the Noticee via Speed Post Acknowledgement Due (SPAD) and via email dated October 25, 2021. The proof of service is on record. Vide letter dated November 11, 2021, the Noticee submitted his preliminary reply, in which he denied all allegations levelled against him. He submitted that he has filed SCORES complaint on the SEBI SCORES portal on November 11, 2021, wherein he has sought additional details and disputed the transaction. He stated that he would be able to reply to the SCN only after the disposal of the said complaint. He requested for not proceeding for personal hearing until the disposal of SCORES complaint.
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:Order/BM/DS/2021-22/14711. 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.