Jane Street Appeals to Securities Appellate Tribunal Against Sebi's Market Manipulation Order

Jane Street, a US trading firm, has approached the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) to challenge an order by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi). The order imposed restrictions on the hedge fund due to alleged market manipulations. Jane Street claims that Sebi has not provided essential documents needed for their defence and argues that a recent inspection found no evidence of manipulation.

The appeal seeks to overturn Sebi's orders and requests access to pertinent documents. Jane Street also asks for interim relief, urging SAT to prevent Sebi from taking further actions. Despite complying with the interim order and depositing the impounded amount, Jane Street states that Sebi lifted the restrictions on them.

Allegations and Appeal Details

Sebi's ex parte interim order, issued on July 3, barred four entities of Jane Street from accessing capital markets and imposed a penalty of Rs 4,843 crore. Jane Street contends that this decision was made without adequate information being shared with them. They argue that the lack of document access has hindered their ability to mount a proper defence.

In their appeal, Jane Street highlights that they have adhered to all directives in the interim order. They emphasise that after depositing the impounded amount, Sebi lifted the restrictions placed on them. This development is part of their argument for seeking relief from SAT.

Upcoming Tribunal Hearing

Reports indicate that SAT may hear Jane Street's appeal on September 8. However, as of now, the tribunal's official website has not updated the cause list for that day. This leaves some uncertainty about when exactly the hearing will take place.

Jane Street did not respond to an email inquiry regarding their appeal. The firm's silence adds another layer of intrigue to this ongoing legal matter. Observers are keenly watching how SAT will address these allegations and what implications it might have for both parties involved.

The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent in how regulatory bodies like Sebi handle similar situations in the future. The financial community is closely monitoring developments as they unfold.

With inputs from PTI