SEBI v. Meghana Gosar and Deven Sangoi (front running settlement, 2025)
Settled
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.
In January 2025 SEBI settled front running proceedings against a woman and her brother, the chief investment officer of a large client whose trades she was alleged to have run ahead of. They paid settlement amounts of Rs 44,00,000 and Rs 47,00,000, the first also disgorged Rs 27,77,312.92, and both accepted six-month debarments.
The record
| Agency | SEBI (India) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2025-01-08 |
| Date resolved | 2025-01-08 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | equity shares and equity derivatives traded ahead of a large client's orders |
| Venue | NSE, BSE |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Bars imposed | voluntary six-month debarment from the securities market for each applicant, as a settlement term |
| Defendants | Meghana Gosar ; Deven Sangoi |
| Techniques | Front running |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- 9.1m INR
What is alleged to have happened
Two SEBI whole-time members, Ananth Narayan G. and Kamlesh C. Varshney, issued the settlement order on 8 January 2025. The applicants were Meghana Gosar and her brother Deven Sangoi, who filed suo motu applications to settle, without admitting or denying findings of fact or conclusions of law, enforcement proceedings that might be started against them.
SEBI had examined trades between August 2021 and April 2022 in Ms Gosar's account for possible front running of a 'big client'. It described Mr Sangoi as that client's chief investment officer, privy to the trades and scrips it was investing in. On SEBI's figures, 52 of her 266 equity trade instances and 18 of her 76 derivatives instances were front running, with gross traded value of Rs 42.36 crore, about 48.74 per cent of the total, and she squared off profits of Rs 20.74 lakh on the equity instances. SEBI alleged that Ms Gosar traded ahead of the client and that Mr Sangoi also did so, having given her his information while she supplied her trading account credentials.
The alleged violations were of section 12A(a), (b) and (c) of the SEBI Act and the fraud and unfair trade practice regulations, including the provision on front running. The approved terms were settlement amounts of Rs 44,00,000 from Ms Gosar and Rs 47,00,000 from Mr Sangoi, Rs 91,00,000 in all, disgorgement of Rs 27,77,312.92 by Ms Gosar with interest at 12 per cent a year from 30 April 2022, and a six-month debarment from the securities market for each.
SEBI agreed to take no enforcement action over the alleged violations, subject to the usual reservations if a representation proves untrue, an undertaking is breached or the terms were miscalculated. A settlement contains no finding that a violation occurred.
The record does not show the identity of the big client, the profits attributed to Mr Sangoi, or any criminal case. The disgorgement is stated in rupees and is not included in the settlement total recorded here.
This library tags the matter as front running. 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.
- Front running — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2025-01-08 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.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEBI v. Bhavik Indravadan Shah and others (front running a broker client, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-08-19 | Front Running | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Madhav Stock Vision Pvt. Ltd. and others (front running a large institutional client, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-07-24 | Front Running | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Prijesh Kurani and others (front running a broker's client orders, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-04-30 | Front Running | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Ashok Maheshwari and others (front running a portfolio manager's trades, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-04-27 | Front Running | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Vishvanath Goswami and others (front running a foreign fund's trades, Chaturvedi group, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-03-27 | Front Running | — | judgment |
| SEBI v. Sunny Bhatia and others (front running Sarvottam Securities trades, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-03-24 | Front Running | — | judgment |