SEBI v. Preyashbhai Sathvara and others (Millitoons Entertainment, 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-66228-matched-orders-2022) by email

A SEBI adjudicating officer decided ex parte in December 2022 that nine traders executed synchronised and circular trades in Millitoons Entertainment shares on BSE in 2018, creating about a fifth of market volume, and that most also ignored SEBI summonses. Penalties totalled Rs 85 lakh, with a further penalty on a tenth entity for not providing information.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

8.5m 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

Adjudicating officer Amit Kapoor of SEBI issued this order on 15 December 2022 over trading in Millitoons Entertainment Limited, now Colorchips New Media Ltd, between 20 March and 16 April 2018. The ten noticees were Preyashbhai Sathvara, Sejalben Sathvara, Suresh Prajapati, Dharmeshbhai Vaghela, Vijay Koshti, Mukeshkumar Parmar, Mehulkumar Tundiya, Harishkumar Sakariya, Rekhaben Sakariya and Mobonair Wireless Pvt Ltd.

SEBI alleged that nine of them traded among themselves in a way that created a false appearance of trading and moved the price, violating section 12A of the SEBI Act and regulations 3 and 4 of the PFUTP Regulations 2003. It also alleged that seven of them, and the company Mobonair, ignored summonses to appear or give information during the investigation.

None of the noticees replied to the show cause notice or attended the hearing, so the officer proceeded on the record and treated the charges as unrebutted. The order finds 97 synchronised trades for about 2.78 lakh shares, roughly 21.6 per cent of market volume over six trading days, in which orders were placed within a minute of each other at the same price and quantity. It finds them repeated, adding about Rs 2.35 to the net last traded price, and concludes that the parties met in mind and traded without any real change of ownership.

Penalties: seven noticees were fined Rs 5,00,000 under section 15HA for the manipulative trades and a further Rs 5,00,000 each under section 15A(a) for ignoring summonses, Rs 10,00,000 each; two others were fined Rs 5,00,000 each under section 15HA; and Mobonair was fined Rs 5,00,000 under section 15A(a). The total is Rs 85,00,000.

The record does not show whether anything was paid or appealed, who in fact controlled the accounts, or whether any trading profit was made, since the order does not quantify gain or investor loss. No criminal case is described.

This library tags the matter as matched orders and price manipulation. 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. 2022-12-15 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.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

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

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.