SEBI v. Aanchal Jindal and others (artificial-volume charges, Delta Leasing & Finance, 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.

Report an error in this record (sebi-61419-matched-orders-2022) by email

A SEBI adjudicating officer examined charges that 185 entities generated artificial volume and manipulated the price of Delta Leasing & Finance shares, and found none of the manipulation charges established. Eleven noticees were fined Rs 1 lakh each, Rs 11 lakh in all, only for late or missing share-holding disclosures.

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

The adjudicating officer of the Securities and Exchange Board of India decided the matter on 29 July 2022. The order concerns trading in the shares of Delta Leasing & Finance Ltd and covers 185 noticees, among them individuals, family groups and companies. Eleven of them, including Aanchal Jindal, Ajay Kumar Jindal, Archit Jindal and Meera Mishra, are named in this record because they received penalties.

SEBI alleged four things: that 176 entities passed shares around in a chain of transactions without a change in real ownership, that 78 entities executed synchronized trades creating artificial volume, that about 30 entities manipulated the price across six patches of the investigation period, and that some promoter-linked entities failed to make required disclosures.

The adjudicating officer found the first three allegations not established. He observed that the investigation had not shown connections among the noticees or a common motive, and described the large mass of trading data as insufficient to sustain a case of artificial volume or price manipulation. On the disclosure charge he found that eleven noticees had failed to make required filings under the insider trading and takeover regulations.

Each of the eleven was penalised Rs 1,00,000 under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act, Rs 11,00,000 in all. These are disclosure penalties, not penalties for manipulation, and this record treats the manipulation charges as dismissed. Proceedings against some noticees were also closed because they had died.

The record does not show whether SEBI appealed the dismissal of the manipulation charges, or whether any noticee appealed the disclosure penalties. No market bar was imposed and the order describes no criminal case.

This library tags the matter as matched orders and price manipulation, which SEBI alleged and did not establish. 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.

• Matched orders — 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

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.

• 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.