sebi:WTM/MPB/ISD/192/2021
Facts / Headnote
Ad interim ex-parte order issued; prima facie findings of insider trading violations recorded against Noticees 1-5 and 8; directions issued pending detailed examination
Provisions invoked
- s. 11(4)
- s. 19
- s. 12A
- s. 27
- s. 25
Regulations relied on
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 2(1)(d)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 2(1)(g)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 3(1)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 3(2)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 4(1)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 9(4)
- SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 9A(2)(a)
Parties
- Pranshu Bhutra (Noticee No. 1)
- Amit Bhutra (Noticee No. 2)
- Bharath C. Jain (Noticee No. 3)
- Capital One Partners (Noticee No. 4)
- Tesora Capital (Noticee No. 5)
- Venkata Subramaniam V. V (Noticee No. 8)
Holding
The order prima facie holds that Pranshu Bhutra, Amit Bhutra, Bharath C. Jain, Capital One Partners, Tesora Capital, and Venkata Subramaniam V.V. violated insider trading provisions of the SEBI Act and PIT Regulations by trading in INFY securities while in possession of unpublished price sensitive information (UPSI) relating to Infosys' June 30, 2020 quarterly results.
Full text
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of insider trading in shares of Infosys Limited Page 1 of 55 WTM/MPB/ISD/ 192 /2021
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of insider trading in shares of Infosys Limited Page 2 of 55
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Interim Order in the matter of insider trading in shares of Infosys Limited Page 3 of 55 fund transaction with Mahrishi Alloys Private Limited (Mahrishi) and soon thereafter Mahrishi had fund transaction with Shyama Devi Bhutra (Mother of Amit) and (c) Ram Bilas Bhutra (Father of Pranshu) and Amit are both directors in the Board of Mahrishi. Thus, Amit is a connected person and is reasonably expected to have an access to the UPSI and therefore, he is an insider and on preponderance of probability basis was in possession of the UPSI procured from Pranshu. 4.6. Mr. Bharath C. Jain (hereinafter referred to as “Bharath” / “Noticee No. 3”) and Amit are partners of Capital One Partners. Amit and Bharath are connected through (a) professional relationship and (b) frequent telephonic communication. Thus, Bharath is a connected person and is reasonably expected to have access to the UPSI through Amit and on preponderance of probability basis he was in possession of the UPSI. Hence, Bharath had procured UPSI from Amit and was in possession of the UPSI. Thus, Bharath is an insider. 4.7. As per the partnership deed of Capital One Partners (hereinafter referred to as “Capital One” / “Noticee No. 4”), Amit and Bharath are working partners of Capital One. 4.8. As per the partnership deed of Tesora Capital (hereinafter referred to as “Tesora” / “Noticee No. 5”), Amit, Ankush Bhu
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/ISD/192/2021. 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.