This action was dismissed. The allegations described below were not established. This page is kept online so that the outcome is visible alongside the original filing.

SEBI v. Ethan Constructions Pvt Ltd and others (Sanguine Media volume allegation, 2022)

Dismissed

Checked against the primary document on October 8, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, in a single reading of the order; an independent second reading of 60 SEBI records agreed on every field for 56, the four misses being penalty amounts; a later sample of 50 of the SEBI records added on 9 October agreed on every field for 46. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sebi-63562-wash-trading-2022) by email

A SEBI adjudicating officer on 30 September 2022 disposed of a show cause notice against 17 noticees accused of using connected accounts to inflate trading volume in Sanguine Media shares, imposing no penalty. The order finds the investigation did not establish the claimed pattern of manipulation.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency	SEBI (India)
Date filed	2022-09-30
Date resolved	2022-09-30
Court	SEBI adjudicating officer
Status	dismissed
Asset class	equities
Instruments	Sanguine Media Ltd shares
Venue	BSE
Criminal parallel	No
Defendants	Ethan Constructions Private Limited (entity) ; Anumita Infrastructure Private Limited (entity) ; Sameer Natwarlal Shah (individual) ; Zuber Trading LLP (entity) ; Roho Real Estate Private Limited (entity) ; Anvita Real Estate Private Limited (entity) ; Jabeen Tradelink Private Limited (entity) ; Sanmay Trading Private Limited (entity) ; Indivar Traders Private Limited (entity) ; Sally Real Estate Pvt Ltd (entity) ; Orange Mist Productions Pvt Ltd (entity) ; Sanguine Media Ltd (entity)
Also named elsewhere	Ethan Constructions Private Limited is named in 1 other matter ; Jabeen Tradelink Private Limited is named in 1 other matter ; Orange Mist Productions Pvt Ltd is named in 2 other matters ; Sally Real Estate Pvt Ltd is named in 1 other matter
Techniques	Painting the tape

What was ordered

Civil penalty: —
Disgorgement: —
Prejudgment interest: —
Total relief: —
Alleged gain: —

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

The order, dated 30 September 2022, concerns trading in the shares of Sanguine Media Ltd between 28 December 2016 and 15 February 2017. The noticees were a group of private companies, a partnership firm, an individual (Sameer Natwarlal Shah), people who signed for three of the entities, and the issuer itself. The record names twelve of them above; the notice counted seventeen noticees in total.

SEBI alleged that the connected entities traded in the stock in a way that artificially inflated volume and misled genuine investors, in breach of section 12A of the SEBI Act and the fraud-prevention regulations (PFUTP Regulations). It also alleged that the company had funded some of the traders before and during the period and so was part of the scheme, and the trading was linked to the period around a burst of promotional text messages about the stock.

The officer examined the traders' share of buy and sell volume before and during the promotional-message period and the trades among them. The order records that the entities contributed a significant share of volume in the earlier period, but that the investigation showed no synchronised, circular, reversal or self-trade pattern, no meeting of minds among the noticees, and no price-manipulation allegation. During the message period the trades among the noticees were a small part of market volume. The stock was in the exchange's delivery-based trading group.

The officer concluded that the material did not establish a violation of the cited provisions by any of the noticees, nor any role for the company in manipulation, and ruled that it was not a fit case for a penalty under section 15HA. No penalty or other direction was imposed.

The record does not show whether SEBI appealed, and the order says nothing about any gain or loss.

This library tags the matter as artificial trading volume (alleged). The tagging is ours, not the regulator's.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the order.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

Painting the tape — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

2022-09-30 SEBI order

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

SEBI order

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Action	Agency	Filed	Technique	Penalty	Status
SEBI v. Soumen Mitra and Sanjoy Kumar Dey (V B Industries, remand order, 2025)	SEBI (India)	2025-03-20	Painting The Tape	—	dismissed

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.