Did Sebi ex-chief Madhabi Buch really fail in the Jane Street case?

Mumbai, July 8 (NationPress) Former Sebi Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch has firmly rebutted accusations of regulatory shortcomings, labeling them as a misleading narrative.

On Tuesday, the ex-Chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) denied assertions of regulatory lapses in the management of the Jane Street issue that occurred during her leadership.

Buch, who stepped down in February this year, emphasized that Sebi had detected index manipulation by Jane Street and took several measures, including a cease-and-desist order, between April 2024 and February 2025.

“During that timeframe, Sebi established a multi-disciplinary team to conduct an in-depth investigation. This meticulous inquiry resulted in comprehensive findings that substantiate the order,” Buch stated in her remarks on Tuesday.

She mentioned that the interim order released by Sebi on July 3, 2025, has “thoroughly documented” the sequence of events leading to its issuance.

“Concurrently, Sebi engaged in various policy-level measures in October 2024 and directed the National Stock Exchange (NSE) to issue a cease and desist letter to Jane Street in February 2025,” the former chairperson elaborated.

Jane Street is a proprietary trading firm that operates with its own capital, rather than managing client assets. The company reportedly earned an immense Rs 32,681 crore in profits through stock market manipulation and transferring this amount overseas.

In the meantime, the current chairperson, Tuhin Kanta Pandey, indicated that the regulator is set to enhance the surveillance and monitoring of such entities and their derivative trades.

Pandey stated that Sebi possesses all necessary powers to address manipulative trading practices concerning the New York-based trading giant Jane Street Group, as evidenced by the interim order that has been issued to prohibit the global firm from participating in the Indian stock market.

When questioned about the necessity for additional regulations to combat such entities, the Sebi Chairman remarked that the focus should be on enforcement and monitoring rather than imposing more regulations, asserting that the “order in the Jane Street case speaks for itself.”

“We have acted within existing regulations. Therefore, maintaining the same regulations while enhancing enforcement and monitoring will yield better results. Excessive regulations do not equate to better regulation; they are two distinct concepts,” Pandey noted.

He underscored that considerable analytical efforts were invested in the Jane Street case, as manipulative activities can be executed in numerous ways.