SEBI v. Ushik Gala and others (Suumaya Industries, 2023)

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-78629-insider-trading-2023) by email

On 31 October 2023 a SEBI adjudicating officer disposed of insider trading proceedings against a Suumaya Industries insider, his alleged tippee and a trading firm, imposing no penalty. Trading before the 2021 results looked concentrated, but there was no proof that the results had been communicated.

The record

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

A SEBI adjudicating officer decided this matter on 31 October 2023. The noticees are Ushik Gala, Jignesh Ramniklal Seth and Svasti Commercial LLP. SEBI had examined trading in Suumaya Industries Limited ahead of two results announcements, for the year ended March 2021 on 30 June 2021 and for the half year ended September 2021 on 12 November 2021.

SEBI alleged a chain: Mr Gala, as an insider handling results processes, passed the unpublished results to Mr Seth; Mr Seth passed them to Svasti Commercial LLP, whose partner was a family member; and Svasti traded. It said Svasti bought 31,000 shares in June 2021 and sold them after the announcement for about Rs 12.53 lakh profit, and made about Rs 3.80 lakh on a November trade. The price rose about 10 percent after the first announcement.

The officer found the calls between Mr Seth and Svasti's partner spread across periods and consistent with family contact, found Svasti's trading spread over many days outside the sensitive windows and explained, and noted that call records for the second period were not on file. A funds credit from a 1 percent shareholder was explained and drew no adverse inference. Applying the Supreme Court's Balram Garg ruling, the officer held that trading patterns cannot by themselves prove that information was communicated.

The charges were held not established, no penalty questions were taken up, and the proceedings were disposed of.

The record does not show whether SEBI appealed. The order mentions no criminal case, and no money was ordered.

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. 2023-10-31 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.

• 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.