sebi:WTM/MPB/IMD/WRO/175/2021
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Interim ex-parte directions issued restraining Sai Proficient and its proprietor from acting as investment adviser, accessing securities market, diverting funds, or alienating assets pending conclusion of enquiry; depositories and RTAs directed to freeze demat accounts and transfers.
Provisions invoked
- s. 19
- s. 12A
Regulations
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 13
- Reg. 2(1)(c)
- Reg. 9
- Reg. 25
- Reg. 15
- Reg. 21
- Reg. 15(1)
- Reg. 13(a)
- Reg. 23
- Reg. 21(1)
- Reg. 15(9)
- Reg. 35
- Reg. 25(i)
Parties
- Sai Proficient Research Investment Advisory
- Ms. Meeshika Vishwakarma
Holding
Sai Proficient and its proprietor Ms. Meeshika Vishwakarma prima facie violated IA Regulations, the Code of Conduct, SEBI Act Section 12A and PFUTP Regulations by promising assured/expected returns, failing to redress investor grievances, and not cooperating with SEBI inspection. Interim ex-parte directions were issued restraining them from acting as investment advisers and dealing in securities pending enquiry.
Full text
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of Sai Proficient Research Investment Advisory Page 2 of 19 SEBI conducted an examination in relation to the affairs of Sai Proficient. The website of the entity www.saiproficient.com is not active currently. Hence, the details of the website are taken from the archive pages available on www.archive.org and placed on record. Further, Risk Profiling Form (“RPF”), KYC, Invoices/Receipts issued to clients, Suitability Policy, etc., were sought from the entity. However, Sai Proficient failed to submit any document till date. Hence, the examination was conducted based on analysis of the details available on the archives of website of Sai Proficient, complaints filed by the complainants against Sai Proficient and documents attached with complaints,etc. Based on the examination of documents / information, SEBI prima facie observed the following:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of Sai Proficient Research Investment Advisory Page 3 of 19 3.2. Issue No. 2: Whether Sai Proficient has prima facie, violated any provisions of SEBI Act read with PFUTP Regulations? 3.3. Issue No. 3: If the answer to Issue No. 1 or 2 is in the affirmative, who is responsible for the violations? 3.4. Issue No. 4: If the answer to Issue No. 1 or 2 is in the affirmative, whether urgent
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of Sai Proficient Research Investment Advisory Page 4 of 19 Regulation 25(i): It shall be the duty of every investment adviser in respect of whom an inspection has been ordered under the Regulation 23 and any other associate person who is in possession of relevant information pertaining to conduct and affairs of such investment adviser, including representative of investment adviser, if any, to produce to the inspecting authority such books, accounts and other documents in his custody or control and furnish him with such statements and information as the inspecting authority may require for the purpose of inspection.”
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:WTM/MPB/IMD/WRO/175/2021. 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.