FundingIPO Watch6 MIN READ

SEBI Builds a Second Surveillance System to Weed Out Bad Actors Among Listed Companies and Risky Small IPOs

SEBI Whole-Time Member Kamlesh Varshney says the regulator is developing a secondary surveillance framework to identify and remove bad actors among listed companies, and to flag high-risk small IPOs.

By Shaym Kumar · Author5 October 2026New
SEBI Builds a Second Surveillance System to Weed Out Bad Actors Among Listed Companies and Risky Small IPOs

India's markets regulator is developing a second layer of surveillance designed to identify and eventually remove bad actors among listed companies, a senior official said, in a move that signals a tougher approach to the governance problems that have accompanied the country's retail investing boom.

Kamlesh Chandra Varshney, a Whole-Time Member of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) who oversees corporate finance and market surveillance, said the regulator was working on a secondary surveillance framework aimed at listed companies, PTI reported. Speaking at an industry event, Varshney also said SEBI was taking steps to flag high-risk small initial public offerings in order to protect retail investors from potential losses.

The remarks come at a time when Indian companies have raised record sums from equity markets and when millions of first-time investors have entered the market through mobile trading apps.

From market surveillance to company surveillance

SEBI and the stock exchanges already operate extensive market surveillance systems. These monitor trading for signs of manipulation, insider trading and unusual price or volume movements. Tools such as the Additional Surveillance Measure and Graded Surveillance Measure frameworks place restrictions on trading in stocks that show signs of abnormal activity.

What Varshney described goes further. A second surveillance system focused on listed companies themselves would look beyond trading patterns to the behaviour and fundamentals of the issuers. That might include financial reporting red flags, related-party transactions, frequent changes in auditors, unexplained movements in promoter holdings or business activity that does not match reported revenues.

The stated aim, to identify and ultimately remove bad actors, implies that the framework could feed into enforcement actions, trading restrictions or, in serious cases, compulsory delisting. SEBI has not yet published the design of the system or a timeline for its introduction.

The small IPO problem

The second part of Varshney's remarks concerns small IPOs, particularly on the SME platforms of the stock exchanges. These offerings, often worth a few crore rupees, have attracted extraordinary retail demand in recent years, with some oversubscribed dozens or even hundreds of times within hours of opening.

Regulators and market participants have raised concerns that some of these issues involve inflated valuations, weak fundamentals or business models that appear designed mainly to take advantage of retail enthusiasm. When such stocks fall after listing, retail investors are typically the ones left holding losses.

SEBI has already tightened rules on SME listings, including stricter eligibility criteria and closer scrutiny of offer documents. Flagging high-risk issues, as Varshney described, would add a layer of disclosure intended to make investors pause before applying.

Why it matters now

India's equity market has become one of the most retail-driven in the world. Domestic investors, through mutual fund systematic investment plans and direct equity holdings, have become a counterweight to foreign selling. That was visible last week, when domestic institutions bought about ₹33,455 crore of equities while foreign investors sold nearly ₹34,966 crore.

That dependence on domestic retail capital is a strength, but it also creates a vulnerability. If a run of governance failures or failed small IPOs erodes confidence, flows could slow at exactly the moment the market needs them. Regulators have described this as a matter of baseline trust. Expanding the capital market through outreach alone is not enough; investors must also believe that the companies they buy are genuine.

“For India's equity cult to last, retail investors must trust that the companies they buy are real.”
— TIGI Analysis
a2699296-5a29-4d3f-83a6-b6497bd4a041 (1).png

The balancing act

SEBI faces a delicate trade-off. Tighter surveillance and stronger warnings can protect investors and improve the market's reputation. But excessive restrictions can raise costs for genuine small companies seeking capital, many of which have no realistic alternative to the SME platform.

India's policymakers have actively encouraged small and mid-sized companies to list, viewing public equity as a way to reduce dependence on bank lending and broaden ownership. A surveillance regime that is too blunt risks discouraging that. One that is well designed could do the opposite, by lowering the risk premium investors attach to the entire segment.

The design details will matter. Market participants will want to know which indicators the system uses, how companies are notified, what rights of response they have, and how flagged information is communicated to investors.

Part of a wider push

The initiative fits within a broader effort by SEBI in recent years to use data and technology in oversight. The regulator has invested in analytics capable of spotting manipulation patterns across large volumes of trades and in tracking linkages between entities that may be acting together. ## What a company-focused system could look at

SEBI has not set out the indicators its new system will use, but market practitioners point to several warning signs that regulators around the world track. These include sudden changes in auditors or auditor resignations, persistent gaps between reported profits and operating cash flow, large or unusual related-party transactions, frequent changes in the company's line of business, and sharp increases in promoter pledging.

Combining such information with trading data could help identify companies where price movements are disconnected from fundamentals, a common feature of manipulation schemes in small-cap stocks. Data held by other agencies, such as company filings with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and tax records, could also be relevant, subject to legal provisions on information sharing.

The challenge will be to avoid false alarms. A system that flags too many legitimate companies would quickly lose credibility with investors and impose unfair costs on issuers.

It also comes as SEBI pays increasing attention to the conduct of promoters. Share pledges, related-party dealings and abrupt changes in control have all been the subject of recent regulatory action.

What investors should take from it

For retail investors, the most immediate implication concerns SME and small mainboard IPOs. A formal flag on high-risk issues would not prevent anyone from investing, but it would make the regulator's concern explicit, and would weaken the argument that heavy oversubscription is evidence of quality.

For listed companies, the message is that scrutiny is moving from how their shares trade to how their businesses are run. Companies with clean governance have little to fear and may benefit from a market that is better able to tell them apart from weaker peers.

For foreign investors, including members of the Indian diaspora who invest in Indian markets, stronger surveillance of issuers addresses one of the persistent concerns about Indian mid- and small-cap stocks: the difficulty of assessing governance from the outside. If SEBI's second system works as intended, it could help narrow the discount that governance risk imposes on parts of the Indian market.

TagsSEBIKamlesh VarshneyMarket SurveillanceSME IPORetail InvestorsCorporate GovernanceListed CompaniesInvestor ProtectionIndian Stock MarketCapital MarketsRegulationIPO

Reader reviews

Sign in to rate and review this article.
Loading reviews…