Quick Summary
Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra operates as JK Research Analyst, a SEBI registered Research Analyst carrying INH000024499, active since December 2025. The firm’s own Disclosure Document states the registration was received on 17 November 2023, two years before the date on the SEBI record itself. The website also displays complaint data for 2023 and 2024, years before any registration existed. Its homepage states “0 Complaints So Far” while its own complaint disclosure records one complaint, received and resolved in January 2026. Pricing plans do not state a subscription duration, and its terms specify Bhopal as the jurisdiction for disputes despite the firm being based in Bhavnagar, Gujarat.
Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra holds SEBI Research Analyst registration INH000024499 under the brand JK Research Analyst, and the SEBI record shows that the registration began on 29 December 2025.
The firm’s own Disclosure Document, published on its website, states a different date entirely: 17 November 2023.
That is not a rounding difference or a typo in the last digit.
It is a gap of over two years between what the firm’s own compliance document says and what the regulator’s record shows.
This page works through that discrepancy, the complaint data that carries the same problem, the pricing plans that do not state how long a subscription runs, and the privacy, terms, and Telegram content worth a closer look before you subscribe.
Who Is Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra?
Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra operates as JK Research Analyst, a SEBI-registered Research Analyst based in Bhavnagar, Gujarat, providing stock market research across cash, futures, options, index options, index futures, and commodities.
The firm states its research approach covers technical analysis, market structure, price action, volume behaviour, risk-reward assessment and risk management, and that recommendations are delivered through SMS, email, mobile app notifications and WhatsApp.
It maintains a presence on Instagram, Telegram, WhatsApp and YouTube, and its website publishes the standard set of regulatory disclosures: grievance redressal details, an investor charter, and related compliance policies.
None of this establishes wrongdoing, and nothing further on this page does either.
Where a registered analyst’s conduct does cross a line, the formal escalation route is covered in full further down this page.
Is Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra SEBI Registered?
Yes, the registration itself is genuine.
The date attached to it, however, is where the firm’s own documents stop agreeing with each other.
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Registered Person | Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra |
| Business Name | JK Research Analyst |
| SEBI Registration Number | INH000024499 |
| Validity per SEBI Record | 29 December 2025, Perpetual |
| Registered Address | Office No. H44, 2nd Floor, Tower B, Bhagyoday Co Op Ho Society, Akshardip Complex, Shastri Nagar, Bhavnagar, Gujarat 364001 |
| Correspondence Address | Same as registered address |
| Contact Person | Parekh Bipinchandra |
| [email protected] |
What the INH Prefix Permits
The INH prefix marks a Research Analyst.
It permits publishing research and issuing recommendations to a subscriber base.
It does not permit personalised advice built around an individual client’s income, goals or holdings, trade execution, or portfolio management.
The Registration Date Problem
SEBI’s own record shows this registration becoming valid on 29 December 2025.
The firm’s Disclosure Document, a mandatory document every Research Analyst must publish, states the registration was received on 17 November 2023.
If the November 2023 date were correct, JK Research Analyst would have been operating as a registered analyst for over two years before SEBI’s own record shows the registration existing at all.
If the December 2025 date is correct, the Disclosure Document is stating a registration date that predates the actual registration by more than two years.
Either version means one of the firm’s own documents is wrong, and there is no explanation on the site for which one to trust.
This is precisely the kind of detail worth verifying independently rather than assuming either document is accurate.
Our guide on how registration numbers get misused covers a related pattern worth knowing before you rely on any single document a firm shows you as proof of registration.
Verify the registration date yourself directly on the SEBI intermediary register before relying on either figure the firm publishes.
What Do Parekh Jaykumar’s Research Plans Cost?
JK Research Analyst sells five research plans, each covering a different segment of the market, and each priced identically.
The Published Price List
| Plan | Description | Price |
|---|---|---|
| Stock Cash | Intraday and weekly equity cash strategies | ₹5,000 |
| Stock Future | Futures trading research and strategies | ₹5,000 |
| Stock Option | Intraday and weekly options strategies | ₹5,000 |
| Index Option | Options strategies on Nifty, Bank Nifty and Fin Nifty | ₹5,000 |
| Commodity | Commodity-focused trading, mega lot sizes | ₹5,000 |
What the Pricing Page Does Not Tell You
Every plan is priced at ₹5,000, and that is the only number given.
No subscription duration is stated for any plan. A prospective client cannot tell whether ₹5,000 buys a week, a month, or a year of research.
This matters directly for checking compliance against the ₹1,51,000 annual SEBI fee ceiling.
Without knowing how long a subscription runs, there is no way to annualise the cost and confirm whether it sits within the limit for individual and HUF clients.
The plan descriptions also do not state how many recommendations or alerts a subscriber receives, or how frequently they arrive.
A client is asked to pay ₹5,000 without knowing what they are buying in either quantity or duration.
Before paying for any of these plans, get the exact subscription duration, the recommendation count, and the renewal terms in writing.
Without those three details, ₹5,000 is a number with no service attached to it that you can actually verify.
What Does Parekh Jaykumar’s Complaint Data Show?
Every SEBI-registered Research Analyst must publish complaint data, and here the disclosure carries the same date problem as the registration itself, alongside an internal reconciliation gap.
Monthly Complaint Data
| Period | Carried Forward | Received | Resolved | Pending |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2024 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2026 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Feb 2026 through Nov 2026 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grand Total | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
1. The Table Shows Data For Years Before The Registration Existed
The table includes rows for 2023 and 2024, both years before SEBI’s own record shows this registration beginning in December 2025.
There is no explanation on the site for why complaint data appears for a period before the analyst was registered at all.
2. The Annual And Monthly Figures Disagree With Each Other
The annual disposal table for 2025-26 reports zero complaints received.
The monthly table shows one complaint received and resolved in January 2026, a month that falls inside that same financial year. The two figures cannot both be correct.
3. The Disclosure Is Not Being Updated On Schedule
SEBI requires complaint data to be updated by the 7th of every month.
Blank rows running through November 2026 with no explanation suggest this table is not being actively maintained on that cycle.
One complaint total, received and resolved, is on its face a light record.
The problem here is not the volume. It is that the table containing it cannot be reconciled with either the registration date or its own annual summary.
Why Does the Homepage Say “0 Complaints” When the Disclosure Shows One?
The website’s homepage displays “0 Complaints So Far” as a headline figure.
The firm’s own mandatory complaint disclosure, on a separate page of the same site, records one complaint received and resolved in January 2026.
These are two different numbers describing the same thing, published by the same firm, and nothing on the site explains the gap.
A visitor reading only the homepage would reasonably believe no complaint has ever been filed, which the firm’s own regulatory disclosure does not support.
What Do the Privacy Policy and Terms Say?
Two compliance documents on the site contain language worth reading closely before you hand over any personal or payment information.
1. Personal Information Can Be Shared “For any reason”
The privacy policy states that personal information may be transferred to organisations or individuals with whom the Research Analyst has an interest, for any reason, without the user’s consent.
That is a considerably broader sharing scope than most comparable firms publish, which typically limit sharing to named categories like payment processors or service vendors.
2. Marketing Consent Is Bundled Into Subscribing
By subscribing to any plan, users automatically consent to receiving newsletters, surveys, contests, and promotional updates.
There is no separate opt-in for marketing communications distinct from the research service itself.
3. Calls And Messages Continue Despite DND Registration
The policy states that users consent to calls, SMS, and WhatsApp messages even if their number is registered on the National Do Not Disturb registry.
Registering on the DND list is meant to give consumers control over unsolicited commercial communication, and a subscription clause overriding that registration is worth knowing before you provide your number.
4. Terms Specify Bhopal As The Jurisdiction, Without Explanation
The terms and conditions name Bhopal as the exclusive jurisdiction for any dispute, despite the firm’s registered address being in Bhavnagar, Gujarat, roughly 1,000 kilometres away.
No reason for that choice is given anywhere in the document.
A jurisdiction clause like this does not close off your regulatory options.
SCORES, conciliation and exchange arbitration all run under securities regulation rather than the subscription contract, and all are conducted online regardless of where either party is based.
5. The Liability Disclaimer Is Drawn Broadly
The terms state the firm bears no responsibility for losses arising from its recommendations, market fluctuations, delays, inaccuracies, or technical issues.
Broad exclusion clauses of this kind are common across the sector, and they do not override the statutory rights and protections that apply to a Research Analyst’s clients regardless of what the contract says.
What Does Parekh Jaykumar’s Telegram Channel Promote?
The firm’s Telegram channel is where research calls and updates are delivered, and its promotional messaging follows a pattern worth understanding before you judge the service by what you see posted there.
One message advertises a claimed total profit of ₹55,020 from 16 signals, with 13 targets reportedly hit.
Figures presented this way give a specific number without the context needed to independently assess it: no stated holding period, no realised percentage return, and no confirmation that the entry and exit prices quoted were actually available to subscribers in real time.
The same message promotes the paid premium group directly, suggesting that profit from a single lot could recover the group’s subscription fee, a framing that places more weight on the sales pitch than on the underlying research process.
A single highlighted result, however specific the numbers look, cannot be independently verified from the post alone.
Our broader guide on Telegram trading channels & when to trust covers the questions worth asking of any research provider using this format, registered or not, before you subscribe on the strength of one screenshot.
What Marketing Language on the Website Needs a Closer Look?
A handful of phrases across the site sit closer to promotional language than a plain description of the service.
Statements including “Expert stock market insights and trusted investment guidance,” “Never miss an opportunity,” and “Quality + Growth” are marketing phrases rather than factual descriptions.
Language such as “identify opportunities,” “make the most of market changes,” and “achieve results” can create a positive impression about likely outcomes that no research service can actually guarantee.
None of this amounts to an explicit promise of returns in the way SEBI orders have treated direct profit guarantees.
It is the kind of language a compliance review would ordinarily flag, particularly alongside a homepage complaint figure that does not match the firm’s own disclosure.
How to File a Complaint Against Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra?
Given the specific documentation gaps on this page, a complaint here has firmer ground to stand on than a dispute over research quality would.
Start by getting the basics resolved in writing.
Ask the firm directly which registration date is correct, request the exact subscription duration and number of recommendations for whichever plan you are considering, and ask for confirmation of the actual complaint count against the “0 Complaints” claim on the homepage.
Send your grievance to RA’s email, describing what you were told, what you paid, and what you want resolved. Keep the sent record regardless of what comes back.
If the response is not satisfactory, escalation runs through a specific set of channels, and each one exists for a different stage of the dispute rather than as alternatives to pick from.
1. SEBI SCORES for the Formal Regulatory Complaint
Once a direct grievance goes unresolved, the complaint moves onto the regulator’s own platform.
The SEBI SCORES portal is where that filing happens, and a documented discrepancy between the firm’s own disclosures gives the platform something concrete to examine.
2. SMART ODR for Conciliation if SCORES Does Not Resolve it
Where SCORES closes without a satisfactory outcome, the next stage is structured conciliation rather than a repeat complaint.
The SMART ODR login page covers how a conciliator gets assigned and what documents to bring into that session.
3. Stock Market Arbitration if Conciliation Does Not Settle it
When conciliation still does not produce a settlement, arbitration is the stage that ends in a binding outcome.
Stock market arbitration results in an award enforced through the exchange rather than negotiated with the analyst directly.
That covers each channel on its own, but none of them explain how to actually build and sequence a case from the first email onward.
If you want to know the full process in detail, check our guide complaint against SEBI registered research analyst.
No written confirmation of your subscription length?
We get the plan terms clarified in writing directly from the firm, cross-check the registration details against SEBI’s own record, and put any gap on file in a form the analyst has to respond to. Register with us for a free read on your situation.
Disclaimer
This page is based on JK Research Analyst’s own published material and the SEBI intermediary register, current as of September 2026, and alleges no wrongdoing since no SEBI order stands against the firm.
Registration details, pricing, and website content can change, so verify everything at source before acting. Treat this page as research, not legal or investment advice.
Conclusion
Parekh Jaykumar Bipinchandra holds a genuine SEBI Research Analyst registration, INH000024499, though the date attached to it depends on which of the firm’s own documents you read; SEBI’s record shows December 2025, the firm’s own Disclosure Document shows November 2023.
That same date problem runs through the complaint data, which includes years before any registration existed and an annual figure that contradicts the monthly table sitting next to it.
The homepage’s “0 Complaints” claim does not match the firm’s own disclosure of one complaint either.
Before subscribing to any plan, get the registration date, the subscription duration, and the actual complaint count confirmed in writing, since none of the three are currently consistent across the firm’s own published material.
Report. Recover. Stay Fraud Free.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes, the registration number itself is genuine. Confirm the registration date directly on the SEBI register rather than relying on either date shown on the firm's own website, since its Disclosure Document and the SEBI record do not agree.
The website does not state a subscription duration for any of its five plans. Ask the firm directly in writing before paying, since ₹5,000 without a stated period cannot be checked against the SEBI fee cap or compared to any other plan.
There is no explanation published on the site for the gap. Treat the homepage figure as marketing copy and the mandatory complaint disclosure table as the more reliable source.
No. SCORES, conciliation and exchange arbitration all run under securities regulation rather than the subscription contract, and each is conducted online regardless of where you or the firm are located.
Treat a single highlighted result with caution, since it does not show the holding period, the realised return, or confirmation that the stated prices were actually available to subscribers. Ask for the full run of calls over a stated period before judging performance from one post.
Add us as a preferred source on Google »
