It was only a payments crisis on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) which brought this price-rigging matter to SEBI's attention. Were it not for this crisis which threatened the smooth functioning of the exchange, the rigging would have gone unnoticed by the market regulator.

The BSE and SEBI should have a better price monitoring system rather than just applying a mix of margins and circuit breakers to check abnormal rises. It is well established that price rigging results in a set pattern of prices which can be deciphered and can form the beginning of a routine investigation by the regulator as is done in the better regulatedwestern markets.

Second, it very clear that in many cases price rigging cannot take place without the active connivance of the concerned company management.

This happens in cases where the management has control or access to a large portion of the floating stock. SEBI's investigation of Videocon International's announcement of a creeping acquisition of up to 2 per cent may not be a coincidence.

In market circles it has been very widely debated that the sudden announcement of the creeping acquisition was little more than a poorly disguised bail out of the speculators trapped as a result of the funds crunch.

The point here is that if the company's management chooses to do so, they are in a position to stop price manipulation by virtue of their large shareholdings or at least alert the regulator or stock exchanges if they feel that a particular movement is unwarranted and this should be acknowledged as a part of corporate governance and protection of shareholder interest.