The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the suggestion made by the Central government in a sealed cover on the way forward with respect to the Hindenburg Research report on the Adani conglomerate and the resulting market impact.
A bench comprising of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala stated that the Court will instead appoint a committee on its own because accepting the government’s sealed cover suggestion could give the impression that it is a government appointed committee.
“We will not accept the sealed cover suggestion by you because we want to maintain full transparency and if we accept suggestions in sealed cover it is like we have kept it away from other side as people will think it is a government appointed committee,” the bench stated.
The Court also stated unequivocally that it will not appoint a sitting judge to the committee tasked with investigating the matter.
The bench refused to accept the Central Government’s contention that the report had no market impact.
“But you have said impact on the market is zero.. going by what you said. But stats say investors faced lakhs of crores worth losses,” the Court remarked.
The apex Court was hearing four petitions regarding the report published by Hindenburg Research alleging conglomerate fraud that cost the Adani Group losses of over $100 billion.
The first petition was filed by Advocate Manohar Lal Sharma seeking directions to the SEBI and the Union Home Ministry to conduct an investigation and register a First Information Report (FIR) against Nathan Anderson, the founder of Hindenburg Research and his associates in India.
The second petition was filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari seeking an inquiry into the Hindenburg report by a committee headed by a retired judge of the top court. He has also requested the formation of a special committee to oversee a loan-approval policy for loans exceeding 500 crore.
A third petition was filed by Congress leader Jaya Thakur who sought that the Adani group of companies be prosecuted under various laws and questioned the State Bank of India’s (SBI) and Life Insurance Corporation’s (LIC) decision to invest in Adani shares at allegedly inflated prices.
Thakur also urged the top Court to direct a probe under the supervision of a sitting Supreme Court judge.
The fourt and final petition was filed by one Anamika Jaiswal.
The court had already expressed concern over the losses incurred by concerned Indian investors, which totaled several lakh crores.
The Central government previously informed the Supreme Court that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is fully prepared to deal with the fallout from the report.
