38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, March 03, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Executive

SEBI Imposes Fine of Rs. 45 Lakh on Three Individuals for IPO Fund Diversion

By Parul Singhal      23 November, 2020 02:46 PM      0 Comments
SEBI IPO Fund Diversion PPL

SEBI on Friday (20th November 2020) slapped Rs.45 lakh rupees in fine on three individuals for diverting proceeds from the Initial public offer of paramount print packaging Ltd (PPL) and making wrong disclosures. Individual fine of Rs 15 lakh each has also been imposed on Divyesh Ashwin Dharmesh Ashwin and Anuj Vipin as per the said order. 

According to the order, PPL as a company had mis-utilised Rs 35 crores and diverted Rs 34 crores to nine vendors. The three individuals provided wrong disclosures in the prospectus, as they never intended to utilize the IPO proceeds for the objects states in the prospectus. 

As per the investigation done by SEBI, it was observed that PPL first raised money through the IPO route by concealing material information and making false disclosures regarding vendors. Later, the money was transferred to pre-decided vendors within a few days and thereby mis-utilized and diverted the IPO proceeds. 

Further it was noted that the account of PPL became a non-performing asset by the end of 2013. In 2018, the Bombay High Court ordered winding up of the company. Noting that PPL was owned by Sukhadia family, the regulator that the three individuals were in charge of the company before and listing of its shares. 

SEBI sadjudicating officer Prasanta Mahapatra said in the order, I find that by making reckless and careless representation and by making false, misleading, deceptive, and manipulative disclosures in the prospectus the notices misled the investors and induced them to subscribe to the shares in the IPO of PPL.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

maintenance-obligation-absolute-cannot-be-evaded-on-pretext-of-unemployment-or-pendency-of-other-proceedings-andhra-pradesh-hc
Trending Judiciary
Maintenance Obligation Absolute, Cannot Be Evaded on Pretext of Unemployment or Pendency of Other Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh HC [Read Order]

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules maintenance is absolute; unemployment or pending cases cannot excuse a husband from paying wife and child.

02 March, 2026 01:00 PM
allegations-in-abetment-to-suicide-case-cannot-travel-beyond-contents-of-suicide-note-telangana-hc
Trending Judiciary
Allegations in Abetment to Suicide Case Cannot Travel Beyond Contents of Suicide Note: Telangana HC [Read Order]

Telangana High Court quashes abetment to suicide case against 10 accused, holds complaint cannot go beyond contents of suicide note.

02 March, 2026 01:48 PM

TOP STORIES

ncert-introduces-judicial-backlog-and-corruption-in-class-8-curriculum-highlights-47-crore-pending-cases-across-courts
Trending Judiciary
NCERT Introduces Judicial Backlog and Corruption in Class 8 Curriculum, Highlights 4.7 Crore Pending Cases Across Courts

NCERT updates Class 8 textbooks to address judicial backlog and corruption, citing 4.7 crore pending cases and accountability mechanisms in India’s courts.

25 February, 2026 11:12 AM
delhi-hc-grants-jubin-nautiyal-ex-parte-injunction-against-ai-platforms-e-commerce-sites-for-personality-rights-violations
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Grants Jubin Nautiyal Ex Parte Injunction Against AI Platforms, E-Commerce Sites for Personality Rights Violations [Read Order]

Delhi HC grants ex parte injunction to Jubin Nautiyal against AI platforms and e-commerce sites over unauthorised use of his voice, image and persona.

25 February, 2026 12:48 PM
voluntary-confessions-under-customs-act-are-valid-evidence-for-conviction-sc
Trending Judiciary
Voluntary Confessions Under Customs Act Are Valid Evidence for Conviction: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court holds voluntary confessions under Section 108 of the Customs Act are valid evidence to sustain conviction in smuggling cases.

25 February, 2026 12:54 PM
sc-rules-illegality-of-search-does-not-invalidate-evidence-seized
Trending Judiciary
SC Rules Illegality of Search Does Not Invalidate Evidence Seized [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court holds illegal search does not bar admissibility of seized evidence if relevant and legally admissible under law.

25 February, 2026 01:32 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email