 "Sebi")
Markets regulator Sebi on Thursday disposed of proceedings against Suven Life Sciences Ltd, Jasti Family Trust and four other individuals, including the firm's chairman and CEO Venkateshwarlu Jasti, in a matter related to alleged violation of insider trading norms.
"The allegations levelled against the Noticees regarding violation of the PIT Regulations 2015 and the SEBI Act do not stand established," Sebi said.
Sebi had initiated adjudication proceedings against the firm, Jasti Family Trust, Venkateshwarlu Jasti, Venkata Vajramma Uppalapati, Pardhasaradhi Uppalapati and Lakshmana Rao Veeramachaneni to ascertain alleged violation of Prohibition of Insider Trading (PIT) norms.
It was alleged that certain insiders had traded in the shares of the company while in possession of unpublished price sensitive information (UPSI) during June-September 2015.
Suven Life Sciences allegedly failed to close the trading window in relation to the UPSI.
Also Read
Besides, Venkateshwarlu Jasti allegedly communicated the UPSI and Jasti Family Trust, Venkateshwarlu Jasti, Venkata Vajramma Uppalapati, Pardhasaradhi Uppalapati and Lakshmana Rao Veeramachaneni allegedly traded while in possession of the information.
"I accept the contention by the Noticees that grant of patent to a NCE (new chemical entity) by itself cannot be immediately monetised and is followed by a lengthy process of clinical trials and approvals by appropriate authorities before any kind of monetisation of discovered drugs," Maninder Cheema, adjudicating officer, said in an order.
Hence, grant of patent cannot be considered as UPSI as it is unlikely to have any impact on the immediate performance of the company.
The order also noted that in the absence of information on when the UPSI came into existence, it is not possible to determine whether they had traded during the UPSI period.
"Similarly, for determination of the sensitive period of trading window closure by a Company for its designated persons and their immediate relatives, the date when such UPSI came into existence needs to be determined.
"In the absence of this information, it is also not possible to determine when the Noticee 1 should have closed its trading window," Sebi said.
Noticee 1 here refers to Suven Life Sciences.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
