SEBI v. Adamina Traders Pvt. Ltd. and others (Shantanu Sheorey Aquakult price rigging, 2022)

Judgment entered

✓ 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.

Report an error in this record (sebi-58792-price-manipulation-2022) by email

On 6 May 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer fined eleven connected entities and individuals Rs 20 lakh, jointly and severally, for buying Shantanu Sheorey Aquakult shares above the last traded price to push it up. Two group members that made no price-lifting trades were not penalised.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

2m INR

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. This regulator states penalties in INR. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

A SEBI adjudicating officer, Parag Basu, decided the matter on 6 May 2022. There were 13 noticees (twelve companies or partnerships and one individual, Tushar Pandit Jadhav), part of a group of 21 entities SEBI said had traded Shantanu Sheorey Aquakult Ltd between March 2014 and May 2016. Eight other group entities had been struck off the register of companies and dissolved, so the proceedings against them were not continued. This record names twelve of the thirteen noticees; Yogita Trading LLP is the thirteenth.

SEBI alleged that the group acted together to inflate the price. The share price opened the investigation period at Rs 4.95 and closed it at about Rs 260, against a pre-period price of about Rs 4.72 and a post-period level near Rs 269. The alleged violations were of Regulations 3 and 4 of the 2003 fraudulent and unfair trade practices regulations.

The officer found the entities connected through common directors and acting in a nexus. In 1,252 instances they placed buy orders above the best available sell price, and 225 of those trades were executed above the last traded price, adding Rs 92.75 of positive price movement. Noticees 1 to 6, 8 to 11 and 13 were held to have violated the regulations. Nirvana Mall Management and Wellman Tradelinks were found to be part of the group but had executed no price-lifting trades and were not penalised.

The penalty was Rs 20,00,000 (Rs 20 lakh) under section 15HA, payable jointly and severally by the eleven penalised noticees within 45 days. The order also notes an earlier whole-time member order of June 2021 barring the group from the market for three months, which the Securities Appellate Tribunal upheld in January 2022.

The record does not show total profit or investor loss, whether the penalty was appealed, or what became of the dissolved entities.

This library tags the matter as 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 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. 2022-05-06 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.

• SEBI order

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

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

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

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.