The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has taken stringent action against Avadhut Sathe, a well-known stock-market trainer, and his company Avadhut Sathe Trading Academy Pvt Ltd (ASTAPL). SEBI has banned them from the securities market and directed them to return an estimated ₹546 crore, citing unregistered investment advisory activities. Here’s what you need to know about Sathe and the case:

1. Founder of Avadhut Sathe Trading Academy

Avadhut Sathe established ASTAPL in 2008, which grew into one of India’s most visible stock-market training brands. The academy offered courses, seminars, and mentorship programs to retail investors and traders, building a prominent reputation in India’s financial education space.

2. Market Trainer Since 2008

For over 16 years, Sathe has conducted trading workshops, webinars, and personalized mentorship programs. He positioned himself as a “financial trader, trainer, and mentor,” leveraging social media and in-person events to attract participants seeking to learn stock trading.

3. Runs Multiple Financial Ventures

Sathe is associated with several entities, according to his LinkedIn profile:

• SADHAN Advisors LLP – Partner since 2010
• SADHAN Ventures – Owner since 2008
• VentureIntellect Solutions Pvt Ltd – Director since 2008

These ventures were linked to his broader trading education and financial advisory activities, raising SEBI’s scrutiny regarding regulatory compliance.

4. Based in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR)

Sathe operates primarily out of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region. His academy claimed to have trained and mentored thousands of retail investors across India, with many of his courses promoted as pathways to profitable stock-market trading.

5. Engineering Background

Avadhut Sathe holds a Bachelor of Engineering in Electronics from the University of Mumbai. He also completed a postgraduate diploma in Software Engineering (APGDST) from NCST in 1993. His technical background added credibility to his brand as a “quantitative” and analytical trader-educator.

---

SEBI’s Case Against Sathe

In a 125-page interim order and show-cause notice, SEBI alleged that Sathe and ASTAPL engaged in unregistered investment advisory practices. Key findings include:

• Unregistered Advisory Activity: Sathe reportedly offered buy/sell recommendations disguised as educational content, collecting fees from participants without SEBI registration as an investment advisor.
• Misleading Marketing: ASTAPL allegedly showcased only profitable trades to attract new participants, creating an illusion of guaranteed high returns. Live market data and selective trade examples were used in promotions.
• Funds Collected: SEBI observed that Sathe and ASTAPL collected ₹601.37 crore from over 3.37 lakh participants. The regulator has ordered disgorgement of ₹546.16 crore as unlawful gains.
• Role of Family Members: SEBI noted that while Sathe’s wife, Gouri Avadhut Sathe, handled administrative tasks, the advisory operations were primarily driven by Sathe himself.

Kamlesh Chandra Varshney, SEBI’s Whole-Time Member, emphasized that Sathe and ASTAPL are jointly and severally liable for returning the unlawful gains.

---

SEBI’s Orders

The regulator has imposed the following measures:

• Immediate cessation of all unregistered investment advisory activities.
• Ban on projecting or advertising past profits or participant success stories.
• Prohibition on using live market data during training sessions.
• A direction to stop misleading investors, effective immediately.

SEBI’s action was prompted by a review of ASTAPL’s operations for FY 2023-24, which initially identified selective promotional content featuring high-return trades. A deeper investigation covering the period from July 1, 2017, to October 9, 2025, culminated in the interim ban.

---

Significance of the Penalty

This is the largest financial penalty ever imposed on an individual stock-market trainer in India. SEBI’s move reflects the regulator’s increasing focus on protecting retail investors from misleading marketing practices and unregistered advisory services. The case also signals a crackdown on the growing “finfluencer” ecosystem, where social media personalities offer financial advice without proper regulatory compliance.