SEBI v. SIC Stock and Services Pvt Ltd (broker, self-trades, Mefcom Agro Industries, 2022)
Dismissed
Checked against the primary document on October 8, 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.
In April 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer closed, without penalty, proceedings against a stockbroker accused of executing self-trades and price-lifting orders for two clients in Mefcom Agro Industries shares in 2006-07. No link to the company's promoter group was established.
The record
| Agency | SEBI (India) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2022-04-26 |
| Date resolved | 2022-04-26 |
| Court | SEBI adjudicating officer |
| Status | dismissed |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | Mefcom Agro Industries Limited shares |
| Venue | BSE |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | SIC Stock and Services Pvt Ltd |
| Also named elsewhere | SIC Stock and Services Pvt Ltd |
| Techniques | Wash trading , Price manipulation |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
A SEBI adjudicating officer, Vijayant Kumar Verma, decided the matter on 26 April 2022. The sole noticee is the stockbroker SIC Stock and Services Pvt Ltd, and the shares are those of Mefcom Agro Industries Limited. The period examined ran from January 2006 to June 2007.
SEBI alleged that the broker acted as broker and counterparty broker for self-trades by two clients, Purshottam Khandelwal and Shilpi Modi, and for trades at prices above the last traded price, including many first trades of the day for Mr Khandelwal. The alleged conduct was manipulating the price, creating a false appearance of trading and manipulating the order book, and breaching the broker code of conduct. The scheme was said to be that of a 'Mefcom Group' linked to the promoters.
The order finds no sufficient material to establish that the broker or its clients belonged to that group. It relies on a parallel February 2020 whole-time member order and on earlier adjudication orders that found no conclusive connection for the clients, and it accepts that the broker's off-market share movements with another firm were an ordinary practice for clients without depository accounts with it. It notes that contributing to the last traded price requires collusion, and that the events were from 2006-07.
The officer gave the broker the benefit of doubt and disposed of the notice without any penalty, finding no breach of the broker rules either.
The record does not show whether SEBI appealed, and the order does not decide whether the Mefcom group itself manipulated the scrip.
This library tags the matter as wash trading and price manipulation. 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 2 techniques 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.
- Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2022-04-26 SEBI order
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEBI v. Usha Devi and others (price and volume manipulation of DU Digital Technologies, 2025) | SEBI (India) | 2025-12-31 | Price Manipulation , Matched Orders +1 | — | judgment |
| Victorian man sentenced in market manipulation case (ASIC, 2025) | ASIC | 2025-12-12 | Price Manipulation , Wash Trading | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Indra Pratap Gajraj Singh (Octant Interactive Technologies circular trading, remand dismissal, 2025) | SEBI (India) | 2025-11-27 | Wash Trading , Price Manipulation | — | dismissed |
| SEBI v. Chandrima Mercantiles Limited and others (price and volume manipulation of Quasar India, 2025) | SEBI (India) | 2025-10-31 | Price Manipulation , Wash Trading | — | judgment |
| Victorian man charged over alleged market manipulation (ASIC, 2025) | ASIC | 2025-03-14 | Price Manipulation , Wash Trading | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Sureshkumar Parmar and others (Premier Synthetics Limited circular trades, 2024) | SEBI (India) | 2024-09-30 | Wash Trading , Price Manipulation | — | judgment |