Listed companies have specific deadlines for telling the market about material events. SEBI’s order found that Angel One had not met those deadlines and settled for ₹34,57,145. Here is what the order covered. SEBI Order Against Angel One Over Disclaimer: What Was Examined Angel One, as a listed company, is subject to SEBI’s Listing Obligations and […]
Large-client order information carries real market value if it leaks. SEBI’s order examined exactly that risk at Angel One, settled for ₹21,64,500. Here is what it covered. Angel One Front Running SEBI Order: What Was Examined SEBI’s proceedings centred on whether Angel One had failed to exercise the due skill, care, and diligence needed to
Most of Angel One’s recent SEBI orders were resolved by settlement. This one was not. SEBI imposed a ₹6,00,000 penalty after adjudicating the matter directly. Here is what it found. About Angel One Inactive Client SEBI Order: What Was Examined SEBI’s order identified three separate compliance failures, each tied to specific circulars, and proceeded through
Quick Summary: SEBI is reviewing how settlement prices for derivative contracts get calculated after the Closing Auction Session went live in the equity cash segment on August 3, 2026. The review follows a month of stakeholder feedback, including inputs raised on social media, after the CAS closing price began deciding settlement values on expiry day.
A final order finds Debock Industries inflated its books with fake sales, fake preferential shares and forged bank statements to climb onto NSE’s main board, then diverted ₹49 crore of rights issue money. Twenty-nine people and entities were investigated. Eleven were held responsible. How Did This Case Start? Debock Industries Limited began life as Debock
Trafiksol’s shares were about to list on BSE’s SME platform after its IPO was oversubscribed 345 times. Then a complaint exposed that its ₹17.70 crore software vendor was a shell company. SEBI’s final order now finds the promoters knew, and fines them for inflated sales too. An IPO That was Oversubscribed 345 Times, Then frozen
He showed Yuvraj a SEBI notice as proof his money was “safe”, right after Yuvraj had deposited Rs 25,00,000. The notice was never handed over. The refund never came either. That’s how a fund style pitch can look regulated right up until the moment it isn’t. AIFs move real crores on trust, so verify the
Fake contract notes. A false claim of NSE Investor Protection Fund cover. A partnership that supposedly didn’t need SEBI registration at all. That’s the exact defence one operator gave SEBI, right before being fined. He was managing money the same way plenty of “account handlers” still pitch today, for far less than the legal Rs
India has over 18 crore demat accounts and roughly 1,042 SEBI registered investment advisers. Do that math, and you’ll see why every finfluencer suddenly calls themselves an advisor. Most of them are simply filling a gap that real, accountable RIAs can’t reach. Pay the wrong one and there’s no regulator standing behind a single rupee
“Made Rs 9,000 today. Out of 4 calls of Kunal, he earned profit in 3.” That’s exactly how one college student got pulled in, right before he lost Rs 1,50,000. The analyst’s registration number even checked out on paper. It was the entity behind it that didn’t. Five companies were later found sharing the same
Back in 2010, Max Life Insurance (then called Max New York Life) needed a strong bank partner to sell its policies. It picked Axis Bank. To seal that partnership, Max and Axis entered into a web of share deals involving Max Life’s own shares. Max would issue or sell shares of its insurance arm to
A broker vanished with Rs 7,000 crore of 23,000 investors’ money, and every single one of them had a working trading account until the day it wasn’t. Nobody opens an account expecting that to be their story. Yet almost none of them had checked the one number that would have warned them. Run this SEBI
