SEBI v. Ashok Naskar and others (Edynamics Solutions circular trading, remand order, 2025)

Dismissed

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 9, 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-94508-market-abuse-2025) by email

In June 2025 a SEBI adjudicating officer cleared five men of PFUTP charges as directors of three struck-off companies accused of circular trading in Edynamics Solutions Limited shares in 2017. The Securities Appellate Tribunal had quashed a December 2022 order against them and sent the matter back.

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

This adjudication order of 10 June 2025 concerns five individuals, Ashok Naskar, Manash Das, Sudeb Ghosh, Soumen Mitra and Sanjoy Kumar Dey. SEBI's investigation covered trading in Edynamics Solutions Limited between March and October 2017 and found that several companies, including Vinahast Dealcom, Ekparnik Vintrade and Goldensight Vinimay, had traded the thinly traded stock in a way that created artificial volume and a false appearance of trading. Because those companies had been struck off the register, SEBI proceeded against people named as their directors, and an adjudicating officer decided against them in December 2022.

The Securities Appellate Tribunal quashed that order in September 2024 as it applied to the five and remitted it, so that they could produce documents and make submissions. They said they had never consented to be directors and that their names had been misused.

The officer records that the buy orders of the companies met sell orders placed in structured trades by other entities, producing circular trading within a suspected group. But the officer found that for most noticees the records held only their names, with no supporting document of directorship, while the consent forms for two were unsigned. Citing a Tribunal ruling that registry entries are not conclusive when disputed, the order says the investigation showed what the companies did but said nothing of what these individuals did.

The PFUTP charges were therefore held not established, and the proceedings against all five were disposed of without penalty.

The record does not show who actually operated the companies, whether other entities in the matter were penalised, or any appeal by SEBI.

This library tags the matter as matched orders, reflecting the alleged circular 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.

• Matched orders — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2025-06-10 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 page
• Order (PDF)

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.