SEBI v. Aashu Garg and others (Vikas Proppant and Granite Ltd, 2024)
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 20 March 2024 a SEBI adjudicating officer penalised six of nine noticees a combined Rs 21 lakh for their part in the Vikas Proppant and Granite Ltd scheme. The order found promoters had parked shares in nominee accounts and moved them off-market to related parties who sold them, passing the proceeds back.
The record
| Agency | SEBI (India) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2024-03-20 |
| Date resolved | 2024-03-20 |
| Court | SEBI adjudicating officer |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | Vikas Proppant and Granite Ltd shares |
| Venue | BSE |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Aashu Garg ; Amit Babbar ; Girish Kansal ; Nir Singh Sindhu ; Sanjay Pareek ; Shweta Pareek ; Rajesh Garg HUF ; Anguri Devi Garg ; Rajesh Kumar HUF |
| Techniques | Undisclosed control blocks |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- 2.1m INR
What is alleged to have happened
This adjudication order of 20 March 2024 is a companion to the SEBI final order of January 2024 on the same company, Vikas Proppant and Granite Limited, which is listed on BSE. It names nine noticees, among them an independent director, Aashu Garg, three holders of shares allotted in a 2008 preferential issue, Amit Babbar, Girish Kansal and Nir Singh Sindhu, and family members and Hindu undivided families linked to the Garg family.
SEBI's investigation, covering June 2018 to August 2019, alleged that the three preferential allottees were front or mule accounts holding shares that really belonged to the promoters, Bajrang Dass Aggarwal and Bimla Devi Jindal. The shares were moved off-market to related individuals who sold them on the market, and the sale proceeds were passed back to the promoters. The order also looked at share dealings by relatives of the independent director.
The adjudicating officer held that the scheme was established and that the noticees had acted together in breach of section 12A of the SEBI Act and the 2003 fraud and unfair trade practice regulations. The three allottees were also found to have failed to make required takeover-code disclosures, and the remaining three noticees, family entities, to have breached securities-contracts rules on off-market dealing.
Penalties were imposed individually. The three preferential allottees each paid Rs 5 lakh for the fraud finding and Rs 1 lakh for the disclosure breach, and three family entities were fined Rs 1 lakh each, for a total of Rs 21 lakh. The order's penalty table does not list Aashu Garg, Sanjay Pareek or Shweta Pareek, and the record does not explain their outcome.
The record does not show whether any noticee appealed or paid, and it describes no criminal case. The promoters named were not noticees in this order, and the order refers to Mr Aggarwal as late.
This library tags the matter as undisclosed control blocks (nominee-held promoter shares). 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.
- Undisclosed control blocks — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2024-03-20 SEBI adjudication 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.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Airborne Wireless Network and others (pump and dump, 2025) | SEC | 2025-02-07 | Pump And Dump , Undisclosed Control Blocks | $22.6m | judgment |
| SEC v. Timothy Page, Trevor Page and others (boiler rooms, 2024) | SEC | 2024-11-20 | Boiler Rooms , Undisclosed Control Blocks | $7.7m | judgment |
| SEC v. Brian Quinn and David Skriloff (Environmental Packaging, 2024) | SEC | 2024-10-18 | Reverse Merger Schemes , Undisclosed Control Blocks | $461k | judgment |
| SEC v. Kevan Casey, Adrian James, Jonathan Friedlander and Robert Wheat (pump and dump, 2024) | SEC | 2024-08-09 | Pump And Dump , Undisclosed Control Blocks | — | filed |
| SEBI v. Vijay Mallya (routing of funds through UBS accounts into group-company shares, 2024) | SEBI (India) | 2024-07-26 | Undisclosed Control Blocks | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Giguiere et al. (undisclosed control blocks, 2024) | SEC | 2024-06-13 | Undisclosed Control Blocks , Matched Orders +1 | $875k | judgment |