Market Manipulation. Search

This action was dismissed. The allegations described below were not established. This page is kept online so that the outcome is visible alongside the original filing.

SEBI v. Parthiv Dalal and Shruti Vora (WhatsApp circulation of ITC results, 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-64514-insider-trading-2022) by email

On 31 October 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer closed a proceeding against Parthiv Dalal and Shruti Vora over a WhatsApp message carrying ITC quarterly figures that matched the results announced later that day. No penalty was imposed because higher courts had already rejected SEBI's case on materially identical WhatsApp facts.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency SEBI (India)
Date filed 2022-10-31
Date resolved 2022-10-31
Court SEBI adjudicating officer
Status dismissed
Asset class equities
Instruments ITC Ltd shares
Venue BSE, NSE
Criminal parallel No
Defendants Parthiv Dalal (individual) ; Shruti Vora (individual)
Techniques Insider trading

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

SEBI examined WhatsApp chats seized from members of a group of market contacts after press reports in November 2017 of price sensitive information circulating in private chat groups. This order concerns ITC Ltd and the period 1 to 26 October 2016. The noticees were Parthiv Dalal and Shruti Vora.

SEBI alleged that on 26 October 2016, shortly before ITC announced its results to the exchanges at about 1.52 pm, a message listing ITC revenue from operations, profit before and after tax and other figures reached Ms Vora's phone and was forwarded by her to other contacts. The order records that the circulated numbers differed from the announced ones by between zero and about 2.6 percent, which SEBI took as showing the message was unpublished price sensitive information. It charged both noticees with breach of section 12A(d) and (e) of the SEBI Act and Regulation 3(1) of the insider trading regulations, 2015.

The officer did not decide whether the message was price sensitive or came from an insider. The order instead relies on the Securities Appellate Tribunal's ruling of 22 March 2021 in a closely similar WhatsApp matter, which set aside SEBI's findings, and on the Supreme Court's refusal on 26 September 2022 to interfere, and records that the facts are a replica apart from the company.

The notice was disposed of without any consideration of the merits, and no penalty or other direction was imposed.

The record does not show whether anyone traded on the message, what the source was, or whether SEBI took any further step.

This library tags the matter as insider trading (alleged communication of unpublished price sensitive information). 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. 2022-10-31 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
SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-09-04 Insider Trading $109k settled
CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) CFTC 2026-08-28 Insider Trading $65k judgment
SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading — filed
SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading — filed
SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-08-13 Insider Trading — dismissed
SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-11 Insider Trading $18.7k settled

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.