SEBI bars Sanjiv Bhasin, impounds Rs 11.37 crore in front-running order

What the Record Shows

SEBI, by an ex-parte interim order cum show-cause notice dated 17 June 2025 (Order No. WTM/KV/ISD/ISD-SEC-6/31471/2025-26), passed by Whole Time Member Kamlesh C. Varshney, restrained market commentator Sanjiv Bhasin and ten others from the securities market and impounded Rs 11,37,19,170 - about Rs 11.37 crore - of what it described as prima facie unlawful gains, to be recovered jointly and severally from twelve noticees. The order also barred the broker RRB Master Securities Delhi Ltd from dealing in its proprietary account, froze bank and demat debits of the noticees, and directed preservation of Bhasin's social-media records and an inventory of assets within 15 days.

The order is ex-parte and expressly prima facie. The same document doubles as a show-cause notice proposing disgorgement with interest, longer market bans and monetary penalties under Sections 15HA and 15EB of the SEBI Act. No finding has been finally adjudicated, and the noticees had not been heard on the merits when the order was passed. SEBI's case is a set of prima facie findings, not a concluded verdict.

Bhasin is a familiar face on business television. SEBI's order records that he appeared as a "guest expert" and that his designation was displayed on air as "Director, IIFL", while - the order notes - he was not himself registered with SEBI as an investment adviser or research analyst in his personal capacity. The regulator records that a media group had given him an exclusive on-air contract from October 2023 "on the basis of his experience with IIFL and his popularity among the retail investors".

How It Worked

Per SEBI's prima facie findings, the pattern was one of trading ahead of the audience's own reaction. The interim order describes Bhasin appearing on channels including CNBC Awaaz, CNBC English, ET Now, ET Now Swadesh and Zee Business, as well as on IIFL's platforms and a Telegram channel, and giving mostly buy recommendations with target price ranges.

Ahead of those on-air calls, SEBI records, positions in the same scrips were built in a set of accounts - it names entities such as Venus Portfolios, Gemini Portfolios, Leo Portfolios and HB Stockholdings - routed through the broker RRB Master Securities. The order notes that the broker's managing director is Bhasin's brother-in-law and that its promoter group includes his cousin. When retail buying followed the televised recommendation and lifted the price, those pre-built positions were, per the order, sold into that buying.

SEBI's order places Bhasin at the centre of the arrangement on a prima facie basis and refers to a discussed but unformalised profit-sharing understanding in the ratio of 40:60. The regulator's theory is that the on-air designation and following supplied the trust, and the related-party accounts supplied the trading vehicle: the recommendation moved the price, and the advance positions captured the move.

The procedural posture is an ex-parte interim order and show-cause notice dated 17 June 2025, impounding and account freezes with immediate effect, and a proposed final action - disgorgement, bans and penalties - on which the noticees are still to be heard.

Who Lost Money

SEBI's order does not put a rupee figure on individual investor losses. What it identifies is the counterparty to the alleged scheme: the retail investors who bought on the televised recommendations and provided the buying into which, per the order, the pre-positioned accounts sold.

The reach was wide. SEBI records Bhasin's substantial social-media following and the fact that the recommendations were broadcast not only on national business channels but also to the clients of a SEBI-registered research analyst and investment adviser. The audience, in other words, was the general retail investing public, many of whom would have treated an on-air "Director, IIFL" as an authoritative institutional voice.

The Rs 11.37 crore impounded represents SEBI's prima facie estimate of the unlawful gains, not a tally of what viewers lost. Whether any of that sum is ultimately disgorged, and how it might be applied, depends on the final order that is yet to come.

Where It Stands Now

The interim order remains a prima facie measure, and its enforcement has already been softened on appeal. The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), by an order dated 1 August 2025, granted Bhasin partial relief: it directed that his frozen trading and demat accounts be released on condition that he deposit Rs 1 crore in a fixed deposit with a lien marked in favour of SEBI. After that deposit, SEBI communicated directions to unfreeze the accounts, confirmed in an exchange notice of 14 August 2025.

That partial relief does not decide the case. The impounding, to the extent secured, and SEBI's show-cause proceedings continue, and a final order on disgorgement, market bans and penalties is still awaited. SEBI's findings remain prima facie throughout.

Because the matter is at the interim stage, the presumption of innocence applies in full. SEBI's interim order records allegations and prima facie findings, not proof of guilt; Sanjiv Bhasin and the other noticees are entitled to a hearing on the merits, are presumed innocent until the case is proven, and may pursue their remedies before SAT. Due process continues.

What It Means

The Bhasin matter is, at its core, about borrowed authority. On SEBI's account, the trust-building device was an institutional designation shown on screen - "Director, IIFL" - attached to a person who, the order records, held no personal registration as an adviser or analyst. For a viewer, the title did the persuading.

The concrete, checkable takeaway is straightforward and does not require judging this case. A recommendation on television or a Telegram channel is not the same as advice from a SEBI-registered investment adviser or research analyst, and the two carry very different obligations. Before acting on any on-air call, an investor can check whether the person or firm is registered on SEBI's own list of registered intermediaries, and can treat a target price as a claim to be verified rather than a fact. Trading ahead of a recommendation works only when the audience acts on the call faster than it checks it.

Readers following market-integrity enforcement can use the Oquilia enforcement archive; the case sits alongside actions such as SEBI's recovery of a GDR-case penalty and the Supreme Court's ruling on bank-fraud classification.

FAQ

Does this mean the people named are guilty?

No. SEBI's order of 17 June 2025 is ex-parte and expressly prima facie, and it doubles as a show-cause notice. It records allegations and prima facie findings, not proof of guilt; the noticees are presumed innocent until the case is proven, are entitled to a hearing on the merits, and may appeal to SAT. Due process continues.

What exactly did SEBI order?

SEBI restrained Sanjiv Bhasin and ten others from the securities market, impounded Rs 11,37,19,170 jointly and severally from twelve noticees, barred RRB Master Securities from its proprietary account, froze bank and demat debits, and sought preservation of records and an asset inventory. The order also proposes disgorgement, bans and penalties under Sections 15HA and 15EB.

Has any of this been overturned?

In part. SAT, by an order dated 1 August 2025, directed that Bhasin's frozen accounts be released on his depositing Rs 1 crore as a lien-marked fixed deposit in SEBI's favour; SEBI implemented that in mid-August 2025. The underlying show-cause proceedings and impounding otherwise continue.

What is front-running, as alleged here?

Front-running, as SEBI's order describes it, is trading ahead of information expected to move a price. The prima facie allegation is that positions were built before on-air buy recommendations and sold into the retail buying that followed. It is an allegation to be adjudicated, not an established finding.

Why did SEBI note his 'Director, IIFL' designation?

Because, per the order, that institutional designation was displayed on air and was material to the trust placed in the recommendations, while Bhasin was not personally registered with SEBI as an investment adviser or research analyst. The order treats the borrowed designation as central to how the audience was reached.

Where can I read the official order?

SEBI's interim order cum show-cause notice of 17 June 2025 (Order No. WTM/KV/ISD/ISD-SEC-6/31471/2025-26) is published on sebi.gov.in and can be read in full there.

This report is based on SEBI's interim order cum show-cause notice dated 17 June 2025 in the matter of the recommendations of Sanjiv Bhasin and others, and the subsequent SAT order of 1 August 2025, reviewed on 29 July 2026.