SEBI v. Satsai Finlease Pvt Ltd and others (AKG Exim, 2023)
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.
On 11 August 2023 a SEBI adjudicating officer penalised five noticees Rs 20,00,000 jointly and severally for pushing up the price of AKG Exim shares with higher-priced buy orders, synchronised trades and reversal trades in 2020-21. The investigation started after unsolicited buy-recommendation text messages in March 2021.
The record
| Agency | SEBI (India) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2023-08-11 |
| Date resolved | 2023-08-11 |
| Court | SEBI adjudicating officer |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | AKG Exim Ltd shares |
| Venue | BSE |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Satsai Finlease Pvt Ltd ; Anm Fincap Pvt Ltd ; Savita Holdings Pvt Ltd ; Raj Kumar Bansal ; Ishu Sharma |
| Techniques | Price manipulation , Matched orders |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- 2m INR
What is alleged to have happened
A SEBI adjudicating officer issued this order on 11 August 2023. The noticees are Satsai Finlease Pvt Ltd, Anm Fincap Pvt Ltd, Savita Holdings Pvt Ltd, Raj Kumar Bansal and Ishu Sharma. The shares concerned are those of AKG Exim Limited, and the review period ran from 8 December 2020 to 19 March 2021.
SEBI began looking at the scrip after unsolicited text messages recommending a purchase were circulated on 15 and 16 March 2021. Its investigation then alleged that the noticees entered buy orders above the last traded price, traded synchronously among themselves and made reversal trades, breaching section 12A of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3 and 4 of the PFUTP Regulations.
The order finds those allegations established. It records that in one phase the noticees' synchronised trades made up 4.87 percent of market volume, in a later phase eight synchronised trades between two of them made up 0.26 percent, and reversal trades by four of them accounted for 2.92 percent. The officer concluded the noticees raised the price and created a false and misleading appearance of trading. The order does not link the noticees to the text messages.
Under section 15HA of the SEBI Act the officer imposed a penalty of Rs 20,00,000 on the five noticees together, payable jointly and severally within 45 days. The officer noted that no figure for gain or investor loss had been worked out in the investigation and that the noticees had no earlier violations on record.
The record does not show whether any noticee appealed, what became of the people who sent the messages, or any criminal case.
This library tags the matter as price manipulation with matched orders. 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.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Matched orders — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2023-08-11 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.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.