SEBI v. Tejas Harshadbhai Patel and Nandita Tejaskumar Patel (A.M. Febcon insider trading, 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-64286-insider-trading-2022) by email

On 21 October 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer penalised the chief financial officer of A.M. Febcon Ltd and his wife Rs 35 lakh, jointly and severally, for trading in the company's shares while in possession of unpublished half-year results. The order was made without any reply from either noticee.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

3.5m 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

A.M. Febcon Ltd is a company listed on BSE. SEBI investigated trading in its shares between 23 August and 19 November 2019, around the announcement of half-year results on 14 November 2019 that showed net profit rising to Rs 0.76 crore from about Rs 0.1 crore in the previous half-year. The respondents are Tejas Harshadbhai Patel, the company's chief financial officer and a director, and his wife, Nandita Tejaskumar Patel.

SEBI alleged that the results were unpublished price sensitive information from 1 October 2019, when the company's trading window closed, until 16 November 2019, and that the couple, as insiders, dealt in the shares in that period. It also alleged that they traded while the window was closed, that a trading plan the company had approved for them in January 2019 was never filed with BSE, and that they gave the exchange a false statement that they had no association with the company or its promoters.

Neither noticee replied to the show cause notice or attended, so the officer proceeded ex parte. The order finds that Mr Patel bought 2,01,600 shares and sold 22,400, and his wife bought 1,90,400 and sold 1,00,800, during the UPSI period, that nothing was sold shortly after the results were published, and that the pattern made no sense other than as trading on the information. It holds that both breached section 12A(d) and (e) of the SEBI Act, Regulation 4(1) of the insider trading regulations, the trading-window and code-of-conduct standards, and the disclosure rule.

The penalty was Rs 20 lakh under section 15G (insider trading), Rs 10 lakh under section 15HB and Rs 5 lakh under section 15A(b), Rs 35 lakh in all and payable jointly and severally. The order quantifies no profit and no investor loss.

The record does not show whether either noticee appealed or paid.

This library tags the matter as insider trading. 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.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2022-10-21 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.