Begin typing your search...

LIC keeps tabs to prevent front running trades

State lender puts robust controlling mechanism in place after Sebi bans 5 entities including its employee

LIC keeps tabs to prevent front running trades
X

Mumbai: LIC has initiated measures to keep robust controlling mechanism within organization after the market regulator Sebi banned five companies in a case pertaining to front-running trades. Taking to Bizz Buzz, an LIC spokesperson said requesting anonymity, “we have further placed robust controlling mechanisms along with best practices to prevent any kind of front running.”

Sebi on Tuesday had confirmed that it has imposed a securities market ban on five entities, including an employee of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), in the case related to front-running trades of the state-owned insurer.

All stringent measures for transactional hygiene of the dealing room are put in place, i.e., entry by biometric, CCTV coverage and restriction on electronic gadgets.

Appropriate action against the concerned official has been taken by disciplinary authority by his removal from services of the corporation after following the due administrative procedure, the spokesperson said.

LIC has always been in the forefront of being a compliant organisation and we will continue to strengthen further on all issues of Corporate Governance, an LIC statement said.

Front-running refers to an illegal practice in the stock market where an entity trades based on advanced information from a broker or analyst before the information has been made available to its clients.

The observations made in the present order are tentative in nature and pending further investigation. The investigation will be carried out without being influenced by any of the directions passed or any observation made either in the interim order or in the present order.

Based on the outcome of the investigation, appropriate proceedings may be initiated in accordance with law, Sebi said.

The restraint imposed vide the interim order dated April 27, 2023, on Yogesh Garg, Sarita Garg, Kamlesh Agarwal, Ved Prakash HUF and Sarita Garg HUF from buying, selling or dealing in securities either directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever, shall continue until further orders.

“I find that the submissions of the notices are insufficient to refute the prima facie conclusions drawn in the interim order. No reason or grounds to differ from the prima facie findings in the interim order, and therefore, the finding in the Interim Order that the Noticees have prima facie front run the trades of the big client resulting in violation PFUTP Regulations stands confirmed,” Sebi’s whole time member Ananth Narayan G said in the order.

In April 2023, Sebi barred five entities, including an employee of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), from the securities market and impounded illegal gains of Rs 2.44 crore made by them, in a case pertaining to front-running the trades of the state-owned insurer.

Also, they have been asked to ‘cease and desist’ from engaging in any fraudulent, manipulative or unfair trade practice, including front-running.

Going by Sebi’s order, Yogesh Garg is still professionally associated with LIC. However, LIC has informed Sebi that Yogesh Garg has been transferred from the investment department of the company to another department of the insurance firm.

The five entities are connected through family relations, a common address and a common phone number.

In its order, Sebi found that Yogesh Garg, being a dealer in LIC, was in possession of non-public information regarding impending orders of LIC and acted as an information carrier. He has also, prima facie, used the account of one late Ved Parkash Garg to trade on the basis of the non-public information of LIC.

With respect to the other four entities, they or their accounts were prima facie instrumental in front-running trades of LIC.

These entities are alleged to have made illegal gains by way of the prima facie front-running activity amounting to Rs244.09 lakh.

By indulging in such trades, they, prima facie, violated the provision of PFUTP (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) rules.

Kumud Das
Next Story
Share it