Inside the Jane Street Scandal: How a Global Trading Giant Made ₹43,000 Crore in Options Profits and Faced India’s Biggest Market Ban

In one of the most high-profile financial controversies to hit Dalal Street, India’s capital markets regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), has accused renowned global trading firm Jane Street Group of manipulating Indian stock markets. The firm allegedly earned a staggering ₹43,289 crore through options trading, while simultaneously incurring strategic losses in futures and equities.

SEBI believes these trades weren’t coincidental market moves but part of a calculated scheme to artificially drive stock prices up and down for massive derivative gains. As a result, authorities have imposed a complete trading ban on Jane Street in India and frozen assets worth ₹4,844 crore — making this one of the toughest actions ever taken against a foreign financial institution in India’s history.

Who is Jane Street?
Founded in 2000 in New York, Jane Street is a highly sophisticated proprietary trading firm known globally for its expertise in exchange-traded funds (ETFs), equities, bonds, and options. With over 2,600 employees operating across 45 countries, the firm uses cutting-edge quantitative trading strategies to execute complex trades across multiple markets.

The Allegations
According to SEBI, Jane Street deliberately engineered sharp price movements by making large bets in the options market while taking on controlled losses in other segments. This strategy created temporary imbalances in stock prices, allowing the firm to cash in on derivatives positions.

The scandal has raised critical concerns about the integrity of Indian capital markets and the challenges regulators face in tackling sophisticated algorithmic and quantitative trading practices by powerful global players.

What Happens Next?
Following this action, Jane Street has been barred from accessing India’s securities market, and its domestic operations have come under heavy scrutiny. Financial experts believe this case could prompt tighter market surveillance and new regulatory reforms aimed at controlling high-frequency and algorithmic trading activities in India.