sebi:Order/PM/GD/2022-23/16588
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalties imposed on the Noticee for violations of PFUTP Regulations, IA Regulations, Code of Conduct, and SEBI grievance redressal circular
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 11
- s. 15
- s. 12A
- s. 15H
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 15C
- s. 15E
Regulations
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 2(1)(c)
- Reg. 15
- Reg. 3(a)
- Reg. 15(1)
- Reg. 21(1)
- Reg. 15(9)
- Reg. 21
- Reg. 28(f)
Parties
- Ajay Chauhan (Proprietor Drift Financial Services)
Holding
The Noticee violated Regulations 3(a),(b),(c),(d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(e) of the PFUTP Regulations read with section 12A(a), (b) and (c) of the SEBI Act, Regulation 15(1) of the IA Regulations and the Code of Conduct, and SEBI Circular CIR/OIAE/2014 read with Regulation 21(1) and 28(f) of IA Regulations. Penalties of Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 15C, Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 15EB, and Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 15HA were imposed.
Full text
Adjudication Order in the matter of Ajay Chauhan, (Proprietor Drift Financial Services) Page 2 of 16 1992 for the violation of the provisions of Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2) (a) and 4(2) (e) of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 read with section 12A(a), (b) and (c) of SEBI Act, 1992, Regulation 15(1) of the IA Regulations and Clauses 1 (honesty and fairness), 2 (diligence) and 8 (compliance) of the Code of Conduct as specified in the Third Schedule read with Regulation 15(9) of IA Regulations and SEBI Circular CIR/OIAE/2014 dated December 18, 2014 and Regulation 21(1) read with Regulation 28(f) of IA Regulations. Subsequently, upon appointment of the undersigned as AO vide SEBI order dated June 18 2021, the matter was transferred to the undersigned.
Adjudication Order in the matter of Ajay Chauhan, (Proprietor Drift Financial Services) Page 3 of 16 2021, Noticee informed that he has filed settlement application. However I note from records that Noticee has not submitted settlement application as per laid down procedure under SEBI (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018 to concerned settlement department. Consequently Adjudication Proceedings was reinstituted in the present matter. Vide email dated April 07, 2022 an opportunity of personal hearing was granted to the Noticee on April 12, 2022. However, the Noticee did not avail the said hearing opportunity. In the Interest of natural justice, vide Email dated April 26, 2022 another hearing opportunity was granted to the Noticee on May 04, 2022. On the scheduled date of hearing, Noticee did not appear before me. The Noticee has also not submitted any reply in regards to adjudication proceedings. I note that Hearing Notice was sent through digitally signed email in terms of rule 7(b) of the SEBI Adjudication Rules. The hearing notices were delivered to the noticee and did not bounce back. I note that adequate opportunities of personal hearing have been provided to the Noticee. However the Noticee did not file any reply on merits against the charges levelled in the show cause notice. I am of the opinion that principles of natural justice have been complied with in the present case. As the said Noticee has chosen not to respond to the SCN, it would be appropriate to proceed
Adjudication Order in the matter of Ajay Chauhan, (Proprietor Drift Financial Services) Page 4 of 16 to have admitted charges levelled against them in the show cause notices…………….”.
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/PM/GD/2022-23/16588. 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.