sebi:WTM/PS/05/IVD/ID-06/MAY/11
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Noticees restrained from buying, selling or dealing in securities and from associating with the securities market for a period of 2 years.
Provisions invoked
- s. 12A
- s. 81
Regulations
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 3
Parties
- Ankit Jhaveri
- Yogesh Bhavnagari
Holding
Ankit Jhaveri and Yogesh Bhavnagari were found to be in violation of Section 12A of the SEBI Act, 1992 and the PFUTP Regulations, 1995 and 2003, and were restrained from buying, selling or dealing in securities and from associating with the securities market for a period of 2 years.
Full text
Page 2 of 8 Gaglani had represented the company before the exchanges for this purpose. Further, it was seen that immediately prior to allotment several fictitious demat accounts were opened using forged and fictitious documents. The shares allotted on a preferential basis were found to have been transferred, in some instances, to such fictitious accounts. Following this, the 3 crore unlisted shares issued on preferential basis were routed through various entities acting as conduits, including Ankit Jhaveri and Yogesh Bhavnagari (hereinafter referred to as ‘Noticees’), and offloaded onto unsuspecting investors using the BSE platform, even though BSE had refused listing permission for these additional shares.
Page 3 of 8 written submissions upon request. Consequently, Ankit Jhaveri and Yogesh Bhavnagari, vide separate letters dated January 3, 2010 and December 28, 2010 filed written submissions. The noticees, inter alia, made the following submissions: i. The SCN does not clearly lay down the noticees’ role in the alleged scheme of manipulation. ii. The noticees played no part in the alleged share-swap acquisition of two unlisted companies by STEL within a gap of two months, unfair valuation of shares and swap ratio, preferential allotment of shares to fictitious entities or opening of the DP accounts iii. There has been a failure on the part of the Company, the Exchanges and the Depository and innocent investors like the noticees should not be penalized for the same. iv. Third party delivery was very common at the relevant time. Moreover, the shares were purchased off market from Rajesh Ranka and transferred to the account of M/s. Rajesh Jhaveri as they intended to sell the shares through the latter. This was done to save time and money. However, later the noticees decided to sell the shares through Park light Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. The noticees had no reason to suspect any wrongdoing, and they were not aware of the listed capital of the company. vi. There has been inordinate delay in the investigation due to which the noticees have been severely disadvantaged.
Page 4 of 8 a preferential basis (swap for consideration other than cash) on two occasions. The details are mentioned below:
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/PS/05/IVD/ID-06/MAY/11. 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.