'In the interest of transparency': Fresh plea filed in SC urging court to direct SEBI to complete Adani probe

A lawyer has filed a fresh application with the Supreme Court, urging the top court to ensure there is compliance with its January 3, 2024, order directing the markets regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to complete its pending investigations into the allegations raised by the US-based short seller Hindenburg Research against the Adani Group within a three-month timeframe.

In his plea, Advocate Vishal Tiwari emphasized that the Supreme Court's order explicitly set a three-month deadline for SEBI to conclude its investigations. He argued that the use of the term "preferably" in the order should not be interpreted as an open-ended timeline. Tiwari stressed that the specified period of three months clearly indicates a definitive deadline for SEBI to wrap up its investigations.

Tiwari pointed out in his application that he is not seeking any modification of the January 3 order but expressed concern over the Supreme Court Registry's refusal to accept his fresh application on August 5. Tiwari is among the petitioners in the original case that led to the Supreme Court's January 3 directive.

"It is crucial for the public and investors who suffered losses following the release of the Hindenburg report in 2023 to be informed about the status and conclusions of SEBI's investigations," Tiwari stated in his plea. He underscored the importance of transparency in the investigation process for the benefit of investors.

The plea also referenced a new report by Hindenburg Research, which alleged that the current Chairperson of SEBI, Madhabi Puri Buch, and her husband Dhaval Buch had financial interests in offshore funds connected to the Adani Group's alleged money laundering activities. The report cited whistleblower documents to support these claims.

Tiwari acknowledged that the SEBI chief has dismissed the allegations as baseless and noted that the Supreme Court has previously ruled that third-party reports cannot be considered as evidence. However, he maintained that the allegations have led to an atmosphere of doubt among investors and the general public, and it is imperative that the market regulator addresses this in the interest of transparency.