Insider trading of indian energy exchange limited

Here’s a detailed summary of the SEBI Ex-Parte Interim Order (WTM/KV/ISD/ISD-SEC-2/31727/2025-26) dated 15 October 2025, in the matter of Insider Trading in the scrip of Indian Energy Exchange Ltd (IEX):


:jigsaw: 1. Background

  • SEBI conducted a suo-motu preliminary examination after a sharp fall (–29.58%) in IEX share price on 24 July 2025, following a CERC order on market coupling issued after market hours on 23 July 2025.
  • SEBI also received a complaint alleging insider trading in IEX before the announcement.
  • Investigation period: 1 July 2025 – 14 August 2025.
  • Search & seizure operations were conducted between 18–20 September 2025 at premises linked to the suspects.
  • Digital evidence and statements were collected.

:gear: 2. The CERC Order and UPSI

  • CERC’s 23 July 2025 order introduced Market Coupling — a mechanism to centrally match bids from all power exchanges (IEX, PXIL, HPX) to form a single market clearing price.
  • This meant IEX would lose control over price discovery and likely see reduced volumes.
  • The information was not public before 23 July 2025, and caused a material impact (–29.58% fall).
    :point_right: Hence, it qualified as Unpublished Price Sensitive Information (UPSI) under SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015.
  • Period of UPSI: 1 July 2025 – 23 July 2025.

:busts_in_silhouette: 3. The Noticees (Accused)

Sr. Name PAN Notes
1 Bhoovan Singh BTWPS4875D Main recipient of UPSI from CERC official
2 Amar Jit Singh Soran AAMPS1208C Traded using UPSI
3 Amita Soran AESPS0968P Traded using UPSI
4 Anita BXJPA5277J Linked account
5 Narender Kumar AOPPK9841L Trader and fund conduit
6 Virender Singh FAZPS5201P Trader and partner in linked firms
7 Bindu Sharma EEOPS4198F Linked to Sanjeev Kumar
8 Sanjeev Kumar BJMPS6988P Placed orders for Bindu Sharma; conduit of information

:link: 4. Source of UPSI and Chain of Communication

  • Official-1 (O1): Ms. Yogieta S. Mehra, Chief of Economics Division, CERC.

  • O2 & O3: Deputy and Assistant Chiefs in the same division — part of the internal committee drafting the order.

  • Evidence:

    • WhatsApp and Signal chats between O1 and Bhoovan Singh show she shared confidential CERC documents, meeting minutes, and draft orders.
    • Bhoovan shared these details in a WhatsApp group named “OTC”, including screenshots of internal CERC communications.
    • Bhoovan deleted WhatsApp chats with O1 after receiving queries from NSE on 31 July 2025, but evidence from Signal remained.
    • CERC’s internal draft order, notings, and minutes of 4th & 5th meetings were found in Bhoovan’s phone.
  • Conclusion: Bhoovan obtained UPSI from O1 and disseminated it to others, who traded based on it.


:chart_with_upwards_trend: 5. Trading Pattern & Profit

  • The Noticees had no or negligible trading history in IEX before the UPSI period.
  • During the UPSI window, they took large positions in IEX Put Options anticipating a fall.
  • They booked profits immediately after the CERC order became public.

:moneybag: Profits Made

Name Profit (₹)
Bhoovan Singh 72.04 crore
Amar Jit Singh Soran 22.65 crore
Amita Soran 31.60 crore
Anita 3.09 crore
Narender Kumar 34.53 crore
Bindu Sharma 2.19 crore
Virender Singh 7.04 crore
Total ₹173.14 crore

:dollar: 6. Fund Flow Analysis

Noticee Jai Singh & Co. GNA Energy Pvt. Ltd. JSC Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Total Transferred
Bhoovan Singh 1.00 cr 3.56 cr 4.56 cr
Amita Soran 0.50 cr 0.35 cr 0.85 cr
Narender Kumar 6.25 cr 0.35 cr 8.60 cr 15.19 cr
Virender Singh 6.00 cr 0.04 cr 6.04 cr
Total 13.75 cr 4.30 cr 8.60 cr 26.65 crore

These transfers were to connected entities controlled or operated by the Noticees — suggesting money layering and potential siphoning of illegal gains.


:balance_scale: 7. Prima Facie Findings

  • Noticees traded on the basis of UPSI from CERC officials — violating:

    • Regulation 3(2) and 4(1) of the PIT Regulations, 2015, and
    • Sections 12A(d) & (e) of the SEBI Act, 1992.
  • SEBI observed a coordinated scheme to benefit from insider information.

  • Trading pattern, communications, and fund transfers confirmed pre-planned insider trading activity.


:rotating_light: 8. SEBI’s Interim Directions (Main Part of the Order)

Under Sections 11(1), 11(4), and 11B of the SEBI Act, SEBI ordered:

  1. Impounding of ₹173.14 crore (equal to alleged unlawful gains).

    • Each Noticee must deposit their impounded amount in a fixed deposit (FD) with lien to SEBI.
  2. Complete trading ban: All Noticees restrained from buying, selling, or dealing in securities until further orders.

  3. Freezing of bank and demat accounts:

    • No debit allowed without SEBI’s permission.
    • Credits may continue.
  4. No disposal of assets: Noticees prohibited from transferring or alienating assets until the FD is created.

  5. Full asset disclosure: Noticees to submit detailed inventory of movable and immovable assets, investments, and bank/demat accounts within 15 days.

  6. Relaxation: After depositing impounded amounts, trading in other securities may resume, except IEX.

  7. Derivative positions: Open contracts to be closed within 3 months.

  8. Order effective immediately until further orders.


:scroll: 9. Next Steps

  • Noticees can file replies within 21 days and request a personal hearing.
  • Investigation into O1 (CERC official) and other connected persons is still ongoing.
  • SEBI may later levy penalties or issue further directions under the law.

:receipt: 10. Signatory

Kamlesh C. Varshney
Whole-Time Member (WTM)
SEBI, Mumbai
Order Date: 15 October 2025


:mag: In essence:

This interim order by SEBI uncovers one of the largest insider trading cases in India (₹173+ crore), where confidential regulatory information from CERC was illegally leaked to market participants who profited through IEX options. SEBI has frozen their funds, restrained them from trading, and is conducting further investigation against both insiders at CERC and the traders who used the UPSI.


Summary by ChatGPT

2 Likes

Did Zerodha’s (Roopa K V , Principal Officer) reporting of suspicious transactions help unearth this insider trading?

Its obvious right your internal systems also found this suspicious ??

@nithin

Why no jail for such things.
All they seem to ask is money back. Nothing punitive ?

1 Like

Being a quasi-judicial body, it appears that SEBI has the discretion to initiate the prosecution, meaning all criminal offences don’t necessarily translate to imprisonment unless SEBI decides to pursue it.

SEBI has the authority to recommend criminal prosecution against offenders, which can lead to jail time upon conviction by a special court.

Penalties under the SEBI Act, 1992

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is the primary regulator for the securities market. Its enforcement actions can be both civil and criminal.

Monetary penalties: SEBI can impose heavy fines for violations of securities laws. For fraudulent and unfair trade practices, the penalty can be up to ₹25 crore or three times the illegal profit, whichever is higher. For insider trading, the fine can be up to ₹25 crore or three times the profit made illegally.

Imprisonment: Under Section 24 of the SEBI Act, violations can lead to imprisonment for up to 10 years, in addition to a fine of up to ₹25 crore. This provision is used in serious cases, often when offenders fail to comply with SEBI’s orders.

Other actions: SEBI can also take other punitive measures, such as debarring individuals or entities from the securities market, suspending or canceling the registration of market intermediaries, and ordering the disgorgement (repayment) of illegally gained profits.

IMO, it appears that criminal prosecution happens only when the offender doesn’t comply with the SEBI’s order, which mostly involves fines/monetary penalties and debarment.

More often than not, only when someone doesn’t pay the said fines/penalties, they might get prosecuted and be imprisoned. i.e., as long as they accept and are willing to settle, the punishment ends with just monetary fines.

This could be one of the reason why people are willing to commit more such frauds in financial markets, instead of the punishment being a mandatory imprisonment with fines, it more often than not ends with just fines. i.e., pay the fine and poof, magically, you are absolved of your crimes.

Just my opinion, it could be flawed.

1 Like

All brokers, including us at Zerodha, are required to monitor for suspicious trades and report it to regulators when necessary. While we cannot comment on any specific case, but we strictly follow all compliance obligations and fully respect SEBI’s role in investigating and addressing such cases.

9 Likes