sebi:RA/DPS/48-49/2016
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Both Noticees found to have willfully defaulted in compliance with applicable circulars; Noticee No. 1 defaulted under NSE Circulars NSEIL/LEGAL/3534 dated August 02, 2002 and NSE/MEM/3589 dated September 05, 2002; Noticee No. 2 defaulted under SEBI Circulars MIRSD/DR-1/Cir-16/09 dated November 06, 2009, SEBI/Cir/MIRSD/AP/8/2010 dated July 23, 2010 read with NSE Circulars NSE/MEM/3445 dated June 19, 2002 and NSE/MA/22732 dated February 13, 2013.
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 6
- Reg. 9(f)
- Reg. 15
- Reg. 26
- Reg. 15(1)(b)(d)
- Reg. 16C(2)
Parties
- Noticee No. 1 (Pradeep)
- Noticee No. 2 (Angel Broking)
Holding
Both Noticees were held to have willfully defaulted in compliance with applicable SEBI and NSE circulars — Noticee No. 1 for operating an F&O trading terminal without the required NCFM certification, and Noticee No. 2 (Angel) for wrongly uploading third persons' NCFM certificates into Noticee No. 1's records while allotting the F&O terminal, thereby failing to act with due skill, care and diligence.
Full text
Page 2 of 26 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Noticee No. 2 / Angel) had allowed Noticee No. 1 (who was not having necessary qualification to operate F & O trading terminal) and had wrongly uploaded certificates of a third person into qualification/ records of Noticee No. 1. For the sake of propriety both the Noticees No. 1 & 2 are collectively reffered to as “the Noticees”.
Page 3 of 26 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, REPLY AND PERSONAL HEARING 6. Show Cause Notice No. EAO/RA/DPS/1407/2015 dated January12, 2015and Show Cause Notice No. EAO/RA/DPS/1406/2015 dated January 12, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “SCN/ SCNs”) was served upon the Noticee No. 1 & 2 respectively under rule 4(1) of the Rules to show cause as to why an inquiry should not be initiated and penalty be not imposed on the Noticeesfor the alleged violations as specified in the SCN(s). The allegations levelled against the Noticees in the SCN are briefly mentioned below;
Page 4 of 26 cheque in favour of the firm/ company of the trading member. It was revealed that Noticee No. 1, received an amount of ` 2,24,000/- in his ICICI Bank account no. 003801502538 from Ms. Priyanka Mittal, one of his client, the details are as under. S No Date Name of the client Amount (in `) 1 31/10/2012 Priyanka Mittal 55,000/- 2 16/11/2012 Priyanka Mittal 63,000/- 3 05/12/2013 Priyanka Mittal 1,06,000/-
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:RA/DPS/48-49/2016. 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.