Criminal Liability For Spreading False News To Manipulate Markets
I. Introduction
Spreading false or misleading information to manipulate financial markets is a serious offense because it:
Distorts market efficiency
Misleads investors
Causes financial loss
Undermines investor confidence
This can include:
Rumors about company earnings, mergers, or bankruptcies
Fake news about commodities, currencies, or stock markets
Social media campaigns to inflate or deflate stock prices
II. Legal Framework
Securities Laws (SEBI Act, 1992)
Section 12A: Prohibition of fraudulent and unfair trade practices
Section 12(1): Insider trading and manipulation
Section 24: Penalties for violations of SEBI regulations
Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) Regulations, 2003
Regulation 3: Prohibits price manipulation, false statements, or misleading information affecting securities prices
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860
Section 420: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property
Section 415: Cheating
Section 505(1)(b): Publishing false information with intent to cause fear or panic
Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)
Section 66D: Cheating by personation through electronic communication
Section 69: Power to trace electronic records and origin of messages
Companies Act, 2013
Section 447: Punishment for fraud by officers or directors
III. Key Cases
1. SEBI v. Manish Gupta (2010)
Facts: Accused spread false news regarding a company’s earnings through emails and online forums to artificially inflate stock prices.
Legal Issues: SEBI Regulations 2003, Section 12A; IPC Section 420.
Judgment: SEBI imposed a penalty of INR 10 lakh and barred him from trading for 3 years.
Significance: Clarified that online dissemination of false corporate information to manipulate stock prices is actionable.
2. SEBI v. Rajesh Agarwal & Co. (2012)
Facts: Accused circulated false news about an impending acquisition of a listed company to manipulate its stock.
Legal Issues: SEBI Regulations 2003, Section 12(1); IPC Sections 420 and 505(1)(b).
Judgment: SEBI barred the accused from trading and imposed heavy monetary penalties.
Significance: Demonstrated that rumors of mergers/acquisitions constitute market manipulation.
3. SEBI v. Satyam Computers (2009)
Facts: Company executives falsified financial statements, leading to a collapse in stock prices when the truth emerged.
Legal Issues: SEBI Act Sections 12A and 24; IPC Sections 420, 465 (forgery).
Judgment: Top management was convicted of fraud, misrepresentation, and criminal breach of trust, with penalties exceeding INR 10 crore.
Significance: Corporate false disclosures are treated as both civil and criminal offenses affecting markets.
4. SEBI v. Pooja & Co. (2014)
Facts: Accused spread false news on social media about a commodity company, causing panic selling.
Legal Issues: SEBI Regulations 2003, Section 12A; IPC Section 505; IT Act Section 66D.
Judgment: SEBI restrained the accused from trading for 5 years and imposed fines.
Significance: Shows that social media posts can constitute criminally liable false news if intended to manipulate markets.
5. SEBI v. Pradeep Kumar (2017)
Facts: Accused created fake press releases about an upcoming IPO to inflate pre-listing stock prices.
Legal Issues: SEBI Regulations 2003, Section 12A; IPC Sections 420, 463-465 (forgery).
Judgment: Accused sentenced to monetary penalties and trading restrictions; later, criminal proceedings were initiated under IPC Sections 420 and 463.
Significance: Shows that forged news documents aimed at manipulating stock prices attract both civil and criminal liability.
6. SEBI v. Vinod Chawla (2019)
Facts: Accused spread false news on WhatsApp and Telegram groups about a pharma company, causing volatility in share prices.
Legal Issues: SEBI Regulations 2003, Section 12A; IT Act Section 66D; IPC Section 420.
Judgment: SEBI imposed penalties and trading bans; court proceedings addressed the use of digital platforms for market manipulation.
Significance: Instant messaging platforms are recognized as tools for spreading manipulative news.
7. SEBI v. Future Retail (2020)
Facts: Accused management allegedly leaked misleading information about financial distress to depress stock prices for acquisition purposes.
Legal Issues: SEBI Act Sections 12A, 24; IPC Section 420.
Judgment: SEBI imposed penalties and barred key directors from trading in securities.
Significance: Corporate insiders spreading false information to influence market prices are criminally and civilly liable.
IV. Legal Procedure for Prosecution
Complaint / FIR / SEBI Complaint
Filed by investors, companies, SEBI, or authorities
Investigation
SEBI and cybercrime units trace the origin of false news
Analyze emails, social media posts, press releases, and IP addresses
Assess impact on market price
Chargesheet / Penalty Filing
SEBI Regulations, IPC Sections 420, 463-465, 505(1)(b)
IT Act Section 66D for electronic communication fraud
Trial / Hearing
Evidence: communications, transaction records, social media logs
Expert testimony on market impact
Civil penalties (SEBI fines) and criminal penalties
Punishment
IPC 420: up to 7 years imprisonment, fine
IT Act Section 66D: up to 3 years imprisonment, fine
SEBI: monetary penalties, trading bans, disgorgement of profits
V. Key Takeaways
Spreading false news affecting financial markets is criminally liable under IPC, IT Act, and SEBI regulations.
Intent to manipulate market prices is crucial for prosecution.
Corporate disclosures, press releases, and social media posts are scrutinized.
Both civil (SEBI) and criminal proceedings can arise simultaneously.
Digital platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, and social media are recognized as tools for market manipulation.
Executives, promoters, and individuals spreading rumors are all liable.
RELATED Blog
comments