SAT directs Sebi to defreeze Lalit Bhasin’s accounts in market manipulation case | Company Business News-OxBig News Network

The appellate tribunal has ordered the capital markets regulator to defreeze Lalit Bhasin’s bank accounts, granting him partial relief in the case of alleged market manipulation with his cousin and former IIFL Securities Ltd director Sanjiv Bhasin.

The Securities Appellate Tribunal’s (SAT) directions came in appeals filed by Lalit Bhasin and two companies, challenging the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s (Sebi’s) ad-interim ex-parte order of 17 June made public on Saturday (12 July).

‘Ad interim’ means temporary, while an ‘ex parte’ order is granted based on the request and information of only one party without waiting for the other’s response. Such orders are granted in urgent situations where a delay could cause irreparable harm.

Sebi’s 17 June order barred Bhasin from accessing the securities market for allegedly engaging in front-running and stock manipulation. Sebi asked Bhasin and others to return illegal gains worth ₹11.37crore.

The tribunal, however, asked Lalit Bhasin, along with RRB Master Securities Delhi Ltd and Venus Portfolios Pvt. Ltd, to deposit ₹2 crore in a fixed deposit with a lien in favour of Sebi, only offering partial relief.

A SAT bench of Justices P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Meera Swarup directed Lalit Bhasin to submit his reply to Sebi within four weeks. The proceedings will then have to continue ‘expeditiously’, in accordance with the law, the bench held.

The SAT order is also likely to impact the case against Sanjiv Bhasin. Last week, he filed a petition with the tribunal, alleging that the Sebi order caused significant hardship, as the freezing of all bank accounts and securities disrupted his finances. The matter will be taken up on 21 July.

According to the SAT order, senior counsel Pesi Modi, representing Lalit Bhasin, argued that Sebi had not disclosed how it calculated the alleged profits. He also flagged concerns that the order was adversely impacting the appellants’ dealings with banks. In response, Sebi counsel Sumit Rai contended that the order was only interim and that the details of trade profits would be shared in due course.

Lalit Bhasin has called the 17 June ex parte order “grossly disproportionate” and a “virtual civil death”. The petition has alleged that Sebi passed the impugned order without providing Bhasin an opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice.

Bhasin has claimed the order—which includes a market ban, freezing of bank and demat accounts, and impounding of over ₹9 crore jointly with others—was based on mere presumptions and cherry-picked examples.

The petition has argued that Sebi’s findings rest on “conjecture” without concrete proof linking Bhasin directly to the alleged manipulation. It cited the absence of evidence showing prior knowledge or benefit from the stock recommendations made by his cousin, Sanjiv Bhasin.

“The impugned order results in grave civil consequences… such drastic measures, especially without a hearing, are unconstitutional,” the petition states, urging SAT to quash the order and grant interim relief.

The tribunal, however, noted that five other noticees—Ashish Kapur, Gemini Portfolios Pvt. Ltd, HB Stock Holdings Ltd, Leo Portfolios Pvt. Ltd and Babita Gupta—had already complied with Sebi’s order and deposited their respective amounts.

SAT clarified that all rights and contentions remain open, and no further directions were necessary at this stage. The appeals and associated applications were accordingly disposed of.