SEBI v. Ashok Bothra (Global Infratech and Finance preferential allotments, 2022)

Dismissed

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 9, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, in a single reading of the order; an independent second reading of 60 SEBI records agreed on every field for 56, the four misses being penalty amounts; a later sample of 50 of the SEBI records added on 9 October agreed on every field for 46. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sebi-56443-market-abuse-2022) by email

In February 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer dismissed, without penalty, allegations that Ashok Bothra, an independent director of Global Infratech and Finance Limited, joined a scheme of preferential allotments and price manipulation. The order found no specific evidence of his role in approving the allotments or in the alleged fraud.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

This adjudication order of 25 February 2022 concerns Ashok Bothra, who was an independent director of Global Infratech and Finance Limited (GIFL), a company listed on the BSE since 1996. SEBI investigated trading in GIFL shares between 25 June 2012 and 4 September 2014.

Before that period GIFL made two preferential allotments, on 19 January 2012 to 49 entities and on 12 June 2012 to 44 more, subject to a one-year lock-in. A show cause notice of 8 January 2018 alleged that Mr Bothra was part of a manipulative scheme built around those allotments, which used entities connected to the company and its promoters to manipulate the price for the benefit of the promoters, their related entities and connected allottees. The provisions cited were Regulations 3(a) to (d) and 4(1) of the PFUTP Regulations.

Mr Bothra replied in writing in February 2019 and did not attend a hearing offered in December 2021. He argued that he was a non-executive independent director who was not involved in day-to-day management and held no shares. The adjudicating officer accepted that a director carries responsibilities, but found no specific role or evidence tying him to the board process for either allotment, the allotments themselves, or the alleged scheme, and said it could not be assumed. The officer noted that a whole time member, in a parallel order of July 2021 under sections 11 and 11B, had reached the same conclusion for two independent directors, and cited tribunal rulings requiring clear evidence before an independent director is held liable.

The officer held the alleged violation of the PFUTP Regulations not established and disposed of the show cause notice without imposing any penalty. The order does not describe the trading pattern in GIFL in detail, and the record does not show the outcome for the promoters and other noticees in the wider matter beyond the reference to the whole time member's order, or whether anyone appealed. It records no criminal case.

This library tags the matter as price manipulation, because the alleged scheme was to push up the price through connected entities; the allegation against this noticee was not established. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the order.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2022-02-25 SEBI adjudication order (no penalty)

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEBI order

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.