What LIC said on employee’s involvement?

“We have further placed robust controlling mechanisms along with best practices to prevent any kind of front running,” LIC said asserting that strict measures for transactional hygiene of the dealing room have been put in place.

“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 insurer said.

What SEBI said on the matter?

The Securities and Exchange Board of India said, “The Interim Order was passed based on the prima facie conclusions to prevent further perpetration of fraudulent trading activity and to prevent defalcation of the wrongful gains cumulatively amounting to INR 244.09 lakh (as elaborated in the Interim Order). In view of the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, I find that the submissions of the Notices are insufficient to refute the prima facie conclusions drawn in the Interim Order. I further note that a detailed investigation is ongoing in the present matter. I see 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 Big Client resulting in violation of section 12A (a), (b), (c) and (e) of the SEBI Act and regulations 3(a), 3 (b), 3 (c), 3(d), 4(1) and 4(2)(q) of PFUTP Regulations stands confirmed.”

What Sebi said on the investigation?

The regulator started investigation after they got surveillance alerts about possible front running between January 2022 and March 2022. Trades between January 1, 2020 and March 15, 2022, were also examined, it said.