The high-profile tussle between US-based proprietary trading giant Jane Street and market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) intensified this week, with the securities appellate tribunal (SAT) scheduling the next hearing in the case for 18 November 2025 and directing SEBI to file its reply within three weeks.
At the centre of the dispute is Jane Street’s claim that SEBI withheld crucial internal reports which, according to the firm, had previously cleared it of charges of market manipulation. In its appeal before SAT on 8 September 2025, Jane Street reportedly alleged that both, the National Stock Exchange (NSE)’s surveillance report and SEBI’s own internal surveillance department (ISD) report, had found no evidence of manipulation in its trades. Counsel for the firm argued that SEBI had 'junked its own reports to pass an adverse order', calling the regulator’s stance a
volte face, says
a report from CNBC TV18.
"Jane Street told the tribunal that the NSE had examined 53 time slots and found no manipulation in 48 of them, while SEBI’s ISD report had concluded that there was no undue benefit to the firm and that the matter need not be pursued further," the report says.
Despite this, it says, SEBI on 4 July 2025 barred Jane Street from Indian markets on allegations that the firm manipulated Bank Nifty through high-frequency trading. The firm was also directed to deposit over Rs4,800 crore in escrow which it has complied with. Jane Street argued before SAT that this requirement was unfair, particularly when smaller players would not have the resources to comply with such stringent conditions.
The firm has sought access to internal communications between SEBI and NSE to understand how different wings of the regulator came to differing conclusions after examining the same trading data. It also questioned why the regulator’s own surveillance report was not mentioned in the July order.
SEBI, however, has dismissed the firm’s plea as a 'fishing expedition'. The regulator reportedly told SAT that it has already shared around 10GB (gigabytes) of data with Jane Street and is not legally obliged to provide further details at this stage.
The market regulator maintained that its investigation is ongoing, that a show-cause notice (SCN) is yet to be issued and that disclosing additional internal documents could compromise the inquiry.
According to
a report from NDTV Profit during the hearing on 9th September, SEBI reiterated its allegation that Jane Street had engaged in manipulative trading by buying large quantities of Bank Nifty contracts in the morning and later executing contradictory derivative trades, effectively dumping stocks. The regulator says the firm has not yet explained the rationale behind this strategy.
In response, Jane Street reportedly argued that SEBI’s interim order was harsh and lacking in transparency. “You say that we have manipulated but you do not wish to disclose any details to me. You hold press conferences and condemn us in public,” the firm’s counsel told the tribunal.
The SAT bench acknowledged Jane Street’s deposit of Rs4,800 crore in escrow and noted its request for key documents to be able to respond effectively to the allegations. While granting SEBI three weeks to file its response, the tribunal has sought a clear explanation of why further information cannot be shared. The matter will next be heard on 18 November 2025.
On 4 July 2025, the market regulator barred the firm from trading in Indian markets and ordered it to deposit Rs4,843.57 crore, described as 'unlawful gains', in an escrow account.
SEBI’s interim order targeted four entities under the Jane Street group, including JSI Investments Pvt Ltd, JSI2 Investments Pvt Ltd, Jane Street Singapore Pte Ltd and Jane Street Asia Trading Ltd.
According to SEBI, the group deployed a profit-maximising strategy that booked substantial profits in index options while absorbing smaller losses in cash and futures segments.
Jane Street denied wrongdoing, calling the trades 'standard arbitrage' and reserving the right to challenge the order in court. After depositing the funds, the firm was allowed to resume trading on 21 July 2025 but remains under restrictions prohibiting any manipulative or unfair trade practices.
You may also want to read...
