Adani-Hindenburg

Truth Has Prevailed, Says Adani After SC Ruling On Adani-Hindenburg Row

Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani on Wednesday welcomed the ruling of the Supreme Court declining to transfer the probe into the Adani-Hindenburg matter from market regulator SEBI to a SIT (Special Investigation Team) or the CBI.

Adani tweeted saying that the judgement shows that truth has prevailed and said he was grateful to those who stood by the Adani Group.

“Satyameva Jayate. I am grateful to those who stood by us,” he posted on X.

“Our humble contribution to India’s growth story will continue,” the X post added.

In a relief to the Adani group of companies, a bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, PS Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said the scope of power of the apex court to enter into the regulatory domain of SEBI is limited.

It said the scope of judicial review is only to see whether any fundamental right has been violated.

The verdict of the top court came on a batch of petitions seeking a court-monitored investigation or CBI probe into the allegations made by US-based firm Hindenburg Research against the Adani group of companies regarding violations of the stock market.

The bench said there has been no regulatory failure by SEBI and the market regulator cannot be expected to carry on its functions based on press reports though such reports can act as inputs for SEBI.

The top court also asked SEBI to complete within three months its probe into two cases pending out of 24 cases.

The case is related to the allegations (part of a report by short-seller Hindenberg Research) that Adani had inflated its share prices. After the publication of these allegations a sharp fall in the share value of various Adani companies, reportedly to the tune of USD 100 billion was seen.

The Adani Group has dismissed the charges as lies, saying it complies with all laws and disclosure requirements.

Various petitions were filed alleging that changes to the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act (SEBI Act) had provided a shield and an excuse for the Adani Group’s regulatory contraventions and market manipulations to remain undetected.

The apex court then asked SEBI to independently probe the matter and also constituted an expert committee headed by retired Supreme Court judge Justice AM Sapre to look into the matter.

In May last year, the expert committee, in its report, found no prima facie lapse on the part of the SEBI in the matter.

While reserving the verdict, the Supreme Court said it has no reason to “discredit” SEBI, which probed allegations against the Adani group, as there was no material before it to doubt what the market regulator has done, and the court does not have to treat what was set out in the Hindenburg report as a “true state of affairs.”.

It had been observed that it cannot ask a statutory regulator to take as a “gospel truth” something that was published in the media.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, had told the apex court that there were many factual revelations in the Hindenburg report.

He said it was for the top court to see whether the investigation done by the SEBI was credible or not and whether some other independent organisation or an SIT needed to be formed to investigate it. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute

Adani-Hindenburg: Easy To Make Allegations, Remarks SC

Hearing the Adani-Hindenburg matter, the Supreme Court on Friday remarked that it is easy to make allegations against anyone and opined the petitioners to show some responsibility while levelling charges against any party.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the remarks when one of the petitioners raised questions over members of the expert committee.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, told the court about one of the members of the expert committee Somashekhar Sundaresan, noting that he has been a lawyer representing Adani in various forums including in the SEBI Board.

CJI DY Chandrachud raised an objection to the petitioner’s submission and remarked that if one goes with the theory that a lawyer who appeared 17 years ago can now not be appointed to the committee and like this, no lawyer who has appeared for an accused should become a High Court judge.

CJI DY Chandrachud remarked that he is not an in-house counsel he was a lawyer and he appeared in 2006 and this conflict arose 17 years later. There has to be some responsibility for the allegations being levelled, SC remarked.

During the hearing, the court also remarked that it is easy to make allegations and one must be also very careful.

“We are not giving a character certificate to anyone,” SC noted.

When the hearing commenced today, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the top court that SEBI is not seeking an extension of further investigation matters relating to the Hindenburg report.

Out of 24 cases in the Adani-Hindenburg matter, investigations in 22 cases are over

For the remaining two cases, they need information from foreign regulators and others and they have been in consultation with them, SG Mehta informed the court.

The court then said that it had intervened in the matter due to the extreme volatility of the stock market and sought to know what is SEBI planning to do for such kind of volatility and planning to protect investors in cases like short selling.

SG Tushar Mehta took the court through the recommendations of the Expert Committee which SEBI has agreed with in principle.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, told the SC that there were many factual revelations in the Hindenburg report. He raised doubts about SEBI’s role in the matter and says a lot of information was available to it in 2014.

Bhushan informed the SC about a letter written in 2014 by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence regarding substantial money siphoned to Mauritius. SG Mehta questioned Bhushan over this and said that DRI concluded the proceedings in 2017.

The court remarked that to advocate Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, it is easy to make allegations and one must be also very careful.

SG Tushar Mehta urged the top court to stop these kinds of allegations.

The court remarked that SEBI, a statutory body looks into stock market frauds. SG Tushar Mehta said that there is a growing tendency to plant stories outside India to influence decisions within India.

After hearing the matter in length, the court reserved the order on various aspects related to the issue.

Earlier, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) filed a status report before the Supreme Court apprising it that out of 24 investigations arising out of the Hindenburg report, 22 are final in nature and 2 are interim in nature.

The investigation was carried out in compliance with the directions of the top court’s order dated March 2, 2023, SEBI has investigated 24 matters.

In the mid of May, the top court gave three months more time to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to conduct a probe into the Hindenburg report SEBI was granted time till 14th August 2023 to conduct the probe.

On March 2, the apex court directed the capital market regulator SEBI to investigate any violations of securities law by the Adani Group in the wake of the Hindenburg report, which led to a massive wipeout of more than USD140 billion of the Adani Group’s market value.

Supreme Court, on March 2, set up an expert committee on the issue arising from the Hindenburg Research report on Adani Group companies. The committee will consist of six members, headed by former apex court judge Justice AM Sapre.

The top court had then asked SEBI to file a status report within two months.

The apex court was then hearing petitions pertaining to the Hindenburg report, including the constitution of a committee relating to regulatory mechanisms to protect investors’ interests.

The January 24 Hindenburg report alleged stock manipulation and fraud by the conglomerate.

The Adani Group has attacked Hindenburg as “an unethical short seller”, stating that the report by the New York-based entity was “nothing but a lie”. A short-seller in the securities market books gains from the subsequent reduction in the prices of shares. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/