Dubai-based Goenka fined Rs 50 cr for inflating RIL securities in UK

London: British financial market regulator FSA has imposed a fine of $9.6 million (about Rs 50 crore) on a Dubai-based Indian investor for manipulating UK-listed securities of Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL).

This is one of the biggest penalties imposed abroad for manipulation of foreign-listed securities of an Indian company. Besides, it is also the biggest fine imposed by the FSA on an individual for market abuse.

The British market watchdog Financial Services Authority (FSA) said in its order that it has fined Rameshkumar Goenka, an Indian businessman living in Dubai for past 12 years, $9,621,240 (about six million British pounds).

Goenka was found to be manipulating the securities of RIL by inflating the closing price of the company’s GDRs (Global Depository Receipts), listed on the London Stock Exchange, on October 18, 2010.

More from Business

Hyundai India’s Rs 27,870 crore IPO oversubscribed by 2.28X, largely driven by institutional investors How Indian fintech startups are driving Malaysia’s UPI-like digital payments revolution

The shares of RIL, the flagship company of the Indian business conglomerate led by India’s richest person Mukesh Ambani, are primarily listed in India, but their GDRs are traded on the LSE also. GDRs are like certificates of shares of a foreign company that can be issued and traded on international exchanges outside the company’s home country.

[caption id=“attachment_128345” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“The fine could have been much higher at over Rs 62 crore but Goenka was granted a 30 percent discount on his fine for settling the case at an early stage of the FSA’s investigation. Reuters”]  [/caption]

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

Tata Harrier EV vs Mahindra XEV 9e: Design and road presence compared

As Trump weaponises tariff, Fed sees a bigger worry: Not jobs, but rising prices in America

Announcing the penalty order, FSA said that “in publishing its findings against Goenka, the FSA is not in any way criticising Reliance.”

FSA said that Goenka was a “prominent” and sophisticated" investor with a substantial portfolio of investments and had failed in a similarly-planned exercise for a different structured product in April 2010.

The fine could have been much higher at over $12.4 million (about Rs 62 crore), but Goenka was granted a 30 percent discount on his fine for settling the case at an early stage of the FSA’s investigation.

FSA said that Goenka on October 18, 2010 placed orders and executed trades which artificially inflated the closing price of Reliance securities on the LSE.

Goenka had held an over-the-counter (OTC) structured product maturing on October 18, 2010, for which the pay-out depended on the closing price of Reliance securities that day.

Because of the inflated price, Goenka could avoid a loss of over $3 million on the previously purchased product. As a result of his manipulation of Reliance closing price, the issuing bank of the structured product had to overpay him $3.1 million.

Dubai-based Goenka’s fine of $9,621,240 comprises a penalty of $6,517,600 and a restitution element of $3,103,640, which will be reimbursed to the bank.

Commenting on the order, Tracey McDermott, acting director of enforcement and financial crime at FSA, said: “Goenka’s structured product was an investment that would have made him a considerable profit had it been successful for him. “When he saw that it was not going to produce the desired result Goenka manipulated the market to avoid a substantial loss,” she added.

FSA said that Goenka had an extensive experience as an investor and his misconduct involved considerable pre-planning and the manipulative trading necessitated very substantial financial outlay and involved others.

Explaining Goenka’s modus-operandi, FSA said that he had arranged for a pre-planned series of substantial and carefully timed orders to be placed in the final seconds of the LSE’s closing auction.

The orders were placed and the trades executed with the intention of increasing the closing price of the Reliance securities above a certain level.

The timing of the substantial orders was intended to ensure that market participants had insufficient time to respond before the closing price was determined.

“The impact of such behaviour goes far beyond one counter-party. Market confidence will suffer if participants cannot be satisfied that the price of quoted securities reflects the proper interplay of supply and demand,” McDermott said.

PTI