{"id":11326,"date":"2025-07-10T13:05:01","date_gmt":"2025-07-10T07:35:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/trending.niftytrader.in\/?p=11326"},"modified":"2025-07-10T13:05:56","modified_gmt":"2025-07-10T07:35:56","slug":"sebis-ban-on-jane-street-may-hold-for-now","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.niftytrader.in\/markets\/sebis-ban-on-jane-street-may-hold-for-now\/","title":{"rendered":"SEBI\u2019s Ban on Jane Street May Hold for Now, Say Legal Experts"},"content":{"rendered":"

Global high-frequency trading giant Jane Street, recently banned by SEBI from trading in Indian securities, may face a long legal road ahead before seeing any relief. According to legal experts, an immediate stay on SEBI\u2019s interim order is unlikely, though the case could be expedited through a directive from the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT).<\/p>\n

Last Friday, SEBI issued a strong interim order banning Jane Street and its Indian arms from participating in the Indian markets. The order also seeks to impound \u20b94,843.5 crore, citing alleged manipulative expiry-day trading practices involving cash and futures segments to distort options pricing.<\/p>\n

No Instant Relief, Say Legal Minds<\/h2>\n

Lawyers well-versed in securities market regulation believe that SAT may not grant a stay but could instead ask SEBI to issue a final order within a specific timeframe.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cAt the appeal stage, the first outcome could be a direction to SEBI for a time-bound disposal in the form of a final order,\u201d said Jayesh H, co-founder of Juris Corp Advocates & Solicitors.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This legal approach is not new. SAT has, in past cases, instructed SEBI to issue a conclusive ruling while ensuring the affected party gets a fair hearing.<\/p>\n

Allegations of Manipulation and Market Distortion<\/h2>\n

SEBI\u2019s order claims that Jane Street engaged in a manipulative trading pattern, especially around the expiry day close. It states that the firm\u2019s trading activities were \u201cprima facie manipulative\u201d and aimed at artificially influencing index prices for unfair gains.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe trading pattern reflects extended marking-the-close activity,\u201d the order says, pointing toward intentional index manipulation.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Legal Threshold for Proof Still High<\/h2>\n

However, some legal experts feel that proving market manipulation under Indian law is not straightforward.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe order leans heavily on circumstantial indicators like timing and market impact,\u201d said Sumit Agrawal, founder of Regstreet Law Advisors and a former SEBI legal officer. \u201cBut without direct proof of intent or artificial price creation, the case may not hold strong in court.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Jane Street\u2019s Response: Denial and Disappointment<\/h2>\n

Jane Street has denied all allegations, stating in an internal communication that the disputed trades were part of \u201cbasic index arbitrage trading\u201d. The firm expressed disappointment over SEBI\u2019s \u201cextremely inflammatory\u201d accusations and said it is working on a formal legal response.<\/p>\n

\n

The company is likely to argue that its trading model was rule-based, transparent, and executed through proper exchange channels. It may also raise questions about procedural fairness, given the ex-parte nature of SEBI\u2019s action.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

If Jane Street can establish that the trades were lawful and lacked manipulative intent, it may be able to obtain relief from the SAT in due course.<\/p>\n

Also Read:\u00a0 Jane Street Hit with Rs. 4,800 Cr Penalty\u2014No Relief Yet for Indian Investors<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

What\u2019s Next?<\/h3>\n

As things stand, Jane Street is preparing to challenge the SEBI order, but the path to relief appears procedural and time-bound, rather than immediate. The legal battle ahead could set an important precedent for how algorithmic and high-frequency Indian regulators view trading\u00a0in the future.<\/p>\n

Know More About<\/strong><\/p>\n