sebi:Order/VV/AA/2021-22/12388
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 violating Section 12A of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations, 2003.
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 12A
- s. 12
- s. 15H
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
Regulations
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(a)
- Reg. 3(a)
Parties
- Nikhil Securities Limited
Holding
The Noticee, Nikhil Securities Limited, violated Section 12A of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations, 2003 by acting as a front entity of Nirmal Kotecha and executing synchronized trades in the scrip of PSTL as part of a manipulative scheme. A penalty of Rs. 3,00,000 was imposed under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Page 2 of 20 (hereinafter referred to as “SAST Regulations”) for an additional 20% stake at a price not less than Rs. 250/- within 14 days, for allegedly violating creeping acquisition norms. With the reports in the media appearing about the impending offer at Rs. 250/-, the price of the shares of PSTL increased on December 22, 2008, when the stock markets opened for the day. On December 22, 2008, PSTL first informed BSE Limited (hereinafter referred to as “BSE”) and National Stock Exchange of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as “NSE”) that the company had not received any communication from SEBI regarding the media reports on Open Offer. BSE disseminated the said disclosure made by PSTL at 10:28:04 AM on December 22, 2008 on its website, while NSE disseminated the same at 10:30:00 AM on the same day.
Page 3 of 20 consequent to the publication of news about the forged SEBI letter. It was also found that some persons/ entities had sold PSTL shares on December 22, 2008 and bought back the shares at lower prices on the same day taking advantage of both the price rise which occurred due to publication of the forged SEBI letter as well as the price fall which occurred due to a clarification on media reports on Open Offer provided by Mr. P.S. Saminathan to the stock exchanges (BSE and NSE) that the company had not received any communication directing Mr. P. S. Saminathan to make open offer.
Page 4 of 20 Regulation 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations, 2003. APPOINTMENT OF ADJUDICATING OFFICER 7. Ms. Barnali Mukherjee was appointed as the Adjudicating Officer under Section 15I of the SEBI Act read with Rule 3 of SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Adjudication Rules’) to inquire into and adjudge under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act for the alleged violation of the provisions of Section 12 of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations, 2003 by the Noticee. Pursuant to the transfer of the case to different Adjudicating Officers, the undersigned has been appointed as the Adjudicating Officer in the present matter vide order dated August 09, 2019.
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/VV/AA/2021-22/12388. 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.