Confirmatory Order against Mohit Aggarwal in the matter of Radford Global Ltd.

1. SEBI, vide an ad interim ex-parte order dated December 19, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “interim order”), restrained Radford Global Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Radford" or "the company"), Mr. Mohit Aggarwal (the noticee herein) and 106 other entities from accessing the securities market and further prohibited them from buying, selling or dealing in securities in any manner whatsoever, till further directions. 2. The facts and circumstances leading to the passing of the said interim order have been discussed therein and I do not deem it necessary to repeat the same and burden this order with repetition. The modus operandi as described in the said interim order was that Radford, its directors/promoters, preferential allottees, and Radford Group & Suspected Entities employed a device wherein the company in nexus with the preferential allottees made a facade of preferential allotment. After the expiry of the lock-in period, the Radford Group & Suspected Entities purchased shares from preferential allottees at artificially increased prices. In the whole process, entities of the Radford Group & Suspected Entities provided a hugely profitable exit to the preferential allottees. Hence, the preferential allottees with the aid of the entities of the Radford Group & Suspected Entities misused the stock exchange mechanism to exit at a high price in order to book illegitimate gains with no payment of taxes as long term capital gain (“LTCG”) is tax exempt. 3. At paragraph 35 of the interim order the entities, including Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, have been advised that they may file their objections, if any, within twenty one days from the date of this interim order and, if they so desire, may avail themselves of an opportunity of personal hearing before SEBI, on a date and time to be fixed on a specific request, received from them. 4. I further note that suo motu an opportunity of personal hearing was granted to Mr. Mohit Aggarwal on July 15, 2015. The noticee was also informed that if he did not appear for the personal hearing on the said date, it would be presumed that he had no further submissions to make in the matter and the matter shall be further proceeded with, including passing of appropriate directions on the basis of the material available on record. Mr. Mohit Aggarwal

Order in the matter of Radford Global Limited neither responded to the hearing notice nor appeared during for the personal hearing. Another opportunity of personal hearing was also granted to the noticee on January 14, 2016. However, the notice for hearing returned as undelivered. 5. It is important to mention that though more than fifteen months have elapsed since the passing of the interim order the noticee has chosen not to respond to the hearing notice as well as not to submit his reply. In my view, sufficient time and opportunity has been provided to the noticee to respond to the interim order and to appear before me during the personal hearings. In view of these facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the principle of natural justice has been fully complied with qua the noticee and he is deliberately keeping away from these proceedings and not willing to cooperate in these proceedings. I, therefore, proceed to decide the matter at this stage on the basis of the material available on record. 6. I have considered the findings against the noticee in the interim order and have perused the material available on record.

I note that in the instant case, the directions issued against the noticee are interim in nature and have been issued on the basis of prima facie findings. SEBI had issued directions vide the interim order in order to protect the interests of investors in the securities market. I note that investigation in the matter is in progress and appropriate decision, in accordance with law, would be taken after completion thereof. Thus, the issue for consideration at this stage is whether the directions qua the noticee in the interim order needs to be confirmed, vacated or modified in any manner, during pendency of investigation in the matter. 7. The facts and circumstances of the instant case as brought out in the interim order prima facie shows the modus operandi employed by Radford, their directors, their promoters, preferential allottees, Radford Group & Suspected Entities, wherein the companies in nexus with the preferential allottees made a façade of preferential allotment ostensibly to raise money. The preferential allottees with the aid of the entities of Radford Group & Suspected Entities misused the stock exchange mechanism to exit at a high price in order to book illegitimate gains with no payment of taxes as long term capital gain (“LTCG”) is tax exempt.

Further, para 16 and 17 of the interim order describe the manner in which preferential allottees sold their shares and made huge profit in the whole event. 8. As prima facie found in the interim order, Radford, its directors/promoters, preferential allottees, and Radford Group & Suspected Entities have acted in connivance for implementation of dubious plan, device and artifice that has led to the misuse of stock exchange mechanism to artificially increase price and volume of the scrips to provide illegitimate gains to the preferential allottees in order to claim LTCG benefits that has not only eroded the market integrity but has also been detrimental to the interests of investors who might have been lured to invest in the scrips due to such manipulative and fraudulent trading in the scrips and price movement.

9. I find that the noticee has failed to make out a prima facie case for revocation or modification of the interim order and the material available on record justifies the continuation of the directions passed against him under the ad interim ex-parte order dated December 19, 2014. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that the restraint imposed against the noticee by the interim order cannot be removed at this stage. I, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under section 19 of the SEBI Act, read with sections 11(1), 11(4) and 11B thereof, hereby confirm the directions issued vide the ad interim ex-parte order dated December 19, 2014 against Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, the noticee herein. 11. A copy of this order shall be served on all recognized stock exchanges and depositories to ensure compliance with above directions.

Sd/-

DATE: MARCH 18th, 2016 RAJEEV KUMAR AGARWAL PLACE: MUMBAI WHOLE TIME MEMBER SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA