sebi:SD/AO/75/2009
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violations of Regulations 4(1), 4(2)(a) & 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations established; penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 imposed under Section 15HA of SEBI Act
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(1)
Parties
- Ms. Neelam Raimalani
Holding
The Noticee was found to have violated Regulations 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(e) of the PFUTP Regulations, 2003 by selling 20,000 shares of KCL in the market without owning them and subsequently acquiring the same quantity through off-market transactions to meet pay-in obligations, in collusion with a broker connected to entities manipulating the scrip. A penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 was imposed under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Page 2 of 11 allegedly violating the provisions of Regulations 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), 4(2)(e) & 4(2)(g) of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘PFUTP Regulations’).
Page 3 of 11 inquire into and adjudge under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act, the alleged violation of the provisions of Regulations 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), 4(2)(e) & 4(2)(g) of PFUTP Regulations.
Page 4 of 11 and accordingly was advised to attend the hearing on June 16, 2009 but Noticee failed to appear on the said date. In this regard, I have observed that SCN and the notice of Personal Hearing have been duly received by the Noticee. However, neither the Noticee nor her authorised representative appeared before me.
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:SD/AO/75/2009. 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.