Market Manipulation. Search

SEBI v. IIFL Securities Ltd (reference-price manipulation before a block deal, ICICI Lombard, 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-61409-matched-orders-2022) by email

A SEBI adjudicating officer fined the broker IIFL Securities Rs 25 lakh for selling a large quantity of ICICI Lombard shares for a client just before a September 2019 block deal, which the order finds was done to pull down the reference price. The penalty was imposed under the PFUTP Regulations and the broker rules.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency SEBI (India)
Date filed 2022-07-29
Date resolved 2022-07-29
Court SEBI adjudicating officer
Status judgment
Asset class equities
Instruments ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd shares
Venue BSE
Criminal parallel No
Defendants IIFL Securities Limited (entity)
Also named elsewhere IIFL Securities Limited is named in 1 other matter
Techniques Price manipulation

What was ordered

Civil penalty
—
Disgorgement
—
Prejudgment interest
—
Total relief
—
Alleged gain
—
Penalty as published
2.5m 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

The adjudicating officer of the Securities and Exchange Board of India decided the matter on 29 July 2022. The noticee was IIFL Securities Limited, a registered stockbroker. The stock was ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd, listed on the BSE and NSE. The trades were done for a client, FAL Corporation Ltd, which sold a block of 213.13 lakh shares worth about Rs 2,406 crore on 26 September 2019.

SEBI alleged that the block deal price had to fall within one percent of the volume-weighted average price in the preceding window. To meet a committed price between Rs 1,125 and Rs 1,130, IIFL placed 18 sell orders in under a second at a limit of Rs 1,125 for about 13.6 lakh shares, roughly 17.5 times what had traded earlier that day. SEBI alleged that these orders drove the reference price down to Rs 1,140.33 and that IIFL accounted for all of the net sell pressure in the window.

The order rejects the broker's explanation that it was simply following the client's minimum price instruction. It finds that IIFL placed orders at prices far below available buy orders when higher bids existed, which showed manipulative intent, and that the trades were fraudulent under section 12A and the PFUTP Regulations. It also finds a breach of the broker code of conduct.

IIFL was penalised Rs 20 lakh under section 15HA and Rs 5 lakh under section 15HB, Rs 25 lakh in all, payable within 45 days. No bar on its business was imposed.

The record does not show whether IIFL appealed, what the client or the buyers were told, or any quantified gain. The order says there was no loss it could attribute, and it describes no criminal case. This record covers only the broker, not the client.

This library tags the matter as price manipulation of a block-deal reference price. 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.

Timeline

  1. 2022-07-29 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.

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

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

Action Agency Filed Technique Penalty Status
SEBI v. Shreedhar Yellaiah Kodam (synchronized trades, Well Pack Papers, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-09-22 Matched Orders , Price Manipulation — dismissed
SEBI v. Debock Industries Limited and others (fictitious issues, inflated sales and diverted rights-issue funds, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-08-28 Misleading Issuer Disclosure , Price Manipulation — judgment
SEBI v. Varanium Cloud Limited and others (false accounts, diverted IPO funds and share sales, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-08-25 Misleading Issuer Disclosure , Price Manipulation — judgment
SEBI v. Abhay Dwivedi and others (YouTube promotion, Decillion Finance, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-08-03 Social Media Ramps , Price Manipulation — judgment
CFTC v. George Santos (price manipulation, 2026) CFTC 2026-07-31 Price Manipulation $17.5k settled
SEBI v. Amesh Surajlal Jaiswal and others (Telegram tips, Akash Infra-Projects, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-07-28 Social Media Ramps , Price Manipulation — judgment

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.