SEC v. Sanjay Bhandari, Vinod Singhi, Rakesh Jain (insider trading, 2024)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 3, 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, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. 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 April 2024 the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Sanjay Bhandari and his friends Vinod Singhi and Rakesh Jain with trading ahead of the January 19, 2022 announcement that Zogenix would be acquired, together making about $70,000. All three consented to judgments, subject to court approval: combined disgorgement of $69,140, interest of $9,903 and penalties of $93,648, of which Bhandari's share is $49,015, $7,020 and $73,523.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-25989 |
| Date filed | 2024-04-30 |
| Date resolved | 2024-04-30 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia |
| Status | settled |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Sanjay Bhandari, Vinod Singhi, Rakesh Jain |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 |
| Techniques | Insider trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $93.6k
- Disgorgement
- $69.1k
- Prejudgment interest
- $9.9k
- Total relief
- $173k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on April 30, 2024 as release LR-25989, filing in the Eastern District of Virginia.
The complaint alleges that Bhandari learned of the acquisition from a Zogenix employee in a call about career advice, began buying while still on the phone, and passed the news to Singhi, who in turn told Jain. Singhi and Jain would pay $10,555 and $9,570 in disgorgement and equal penalties, with $1,512 and $1,371 in interest. The recorded totals add the three respondents' stated amounts.
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 release.
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
- 2024-04-30 Litigation release published
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. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Insider Trading | $109k | settled |
| CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-28 | Insider Trading | $65k | judgment |
| SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-08-13 | Insider Trading | — | dismissed |
| SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Insider Trading | $18.7k | settled |