Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): Soma Majumdar, Adjudicating Officer, in six separate Adjudication Orders, while holding the Noticees liable for the alleged acts as per the submissions and the factors mentioned in Section 15J of the SEBI Act, 1992 (the Act) imposed a penalty of Rs 1,00,000/- each, under Section 15A(b) of the Act.

In the instant matter Titan Company Limited (TCL) intimated SEBI about the contravention of SEBI (Prevention of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015 (PIT Regulations) and Company’s Code of Conduct for Prevention of Insider Trading by some of its designated persons/employees. After which, SEBI conducted an investigation in the scrip of TCL and observed certain violations by the designated persons of TCL.

The investigation revealed that the Noticees had traded in the shares of Titan during the period. Details of their trading are as under:-

Calendar Quarter Traded value at NSE Cash segment (Rs.) Traded value at NSE Derivatives segment (Rs.)

 

 

Traded value at BSE cash segment (Rs.) Total traded value (BSE +NSE) (Rs.)

 

 

Jayraj P.

 

April to June 2018

1,79,267

 

28,74,413 0 30,53,680

 

Arjun Vishwakarma

 

April to June 2018

40,62,132 0 0 40,62,132

 

Mekat George

 

April to June 2018

 

23,58,143

 

0 3,68,573 27,26,177

 

Punit Juneja

 

April to June 2018

0 32,50,200 0 32,50,200
 

 

Muniraj Radhakrishnan

 

April to June 2018

 

 

37,826

 

 

 

33, 03,600

 

 

0

 

 

33,41,426

 

Gangadhar Sudheer Kallihal

 

 

11,57,850 0 0 11,57,850

 

 

 

 

July to September 2018

 

19,32,221 0 0 19,32,221

Therefore, the issues before the Tribunal were:

1) Whether the Noticees have violated Regulation 7(2) (a) of PIT Regulations?

2) Does the violation, if any, attract monetary penalty under Section 15A (b) of the Act?

3) If yes, then what should be the quantum of monetary penalty?

The Noticees had contended that they were not aware about the Act, PIT regulations and the Company’s code of conduct for prevention of insider trading.

Answering in affirmation and denying the submissions so put forth by the Noticees, the Tribunal stated,

“As postulated by legal maxim ‘ignorantia juris non excusat’, ignorance of law is no excuse and everyone is presumed to know the law of the land. A person cannot defend his illegal actions by stating that he was not aware his actions were illegal, even if he honestly believed that they were not breaking the law”.

[Titan Company Limited, In re, Order/SM/DD/2021-22/ 13075, decided on 24-08-2021]


Combined Adjudication Order for:

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/ 13075

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/13074

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/ 13073

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/ 13076

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/ 13072

Order/SM/DD/2021-22/13078


Agatha Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.