SEBI v. Jaidev Gupta HUF and others (Esaar India round-tripped preferential allotment, 2022)
Judgment entered
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.
A SEBI adjudicating officer fined one Hindu undivided family Rs 5 lakh in August 2022 for taking back part of its subscription money from Esaar India Limited in a 2011 preferential allotment, and cleared the other two allottees for lack of evidence.
The record
| Agency | SEBI (India) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2022-08-30 |
| Date resolved | 2022-08-30 |
| Court | SEBI adjudicating officer |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | Esaar India Limited shares |
| Venue | BSE |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Jaidev Gupta HUF ; Vinod Gupta HUF ; Bharat Bhushan Gupta |
| Techniques |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- 500k INR
What is alleged to have happened
A SEBI adjudicating officer in Mumbai decided this matter on 30 August 2022, three days after the companion order against Esaar India Limited itself. The noticees were the Jaidev Gupta HUF, the Vinod Gupta HUF and Bharat Bhushan Gupta, all allottees in Esaar's preferential issue of 25 May 2011.
SEBI alleged that the three subscribed a combined Rs 45 lakh while Esaar sent Rs 35 lakh back to the Jaidev Gupta HUF on 21 May 2011, and that the HUF moved Rs 34.06 lakh to Spectra Industries Limited the same day. The three held the chairman and director roles at Spectra. SEBI alleged a to-and-fro flow that made the allotment look like a real capital infusion, in breach of section 12A of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(b), (c), (d) and 4(1) of the PFUTP Regulations.
The Jaidev Gupta HUF said the money was repayment of an old loan from Spectra, but the officer rejected this because no loan agreement was produced. For the other two noticees the officer found nothing tracing money from Spectra to their personal accounts beyond their positions as managing director and chairman, and held the allegation not established.
The order finds that Rs 15 lakh of the Rs 35 lakh flow was fraudulent in nature, because the HUF's payment was in reality Esaar's own money. It imposes a penalty of Rs 5,00,000 on the Jaidev Gupta HUF under section 15HA and disposes of the proceedings against the other two without penalty.
The record does not show whether any appeal followed or what investors lost, and the order does not quantify any gain. No library technique fits the conduct, so the technique list is empty.
This library tags the matter as issuer-side fraud through round-tripped share-subscription funds, with no more specific library technique. 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.
Timeline
- 2022-08-30 SEBI adjudication 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.