Adani-Hindenburg Matter : Supreme Court Affirms Registry's Refusal To Accept Plea To Direct SEBI To Complete Probe

The Supreme Court on January 27 dismissed a litigant's challenge to an order passed by the Registrar of the Court refusing to register his application for direction to the Securities and Exchange Board (SEBI) to file its investigation report in the Hindenburg Research-Adani Group matter.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan passed the order rejecting a Miscellaneous Application filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari.

To recap, on January 3, 2024, while refusing to order SIT/CBI investigation into the allegations levelled in the Hindenburg Research report regarding stock price manipulations by the Adani group of companies, the Supreme Court directed SEBI to conclude the ongoing investigations "preferably" within three months.

Few months later, in June, Advocate Tiwari, who was one of the petitioners in the Adani-Hindenuburg matter, filed an application seeking a direction to SEBI to complete the investigations as per the timeline mentioned in the January judgment.

On August 5, the Registrar Judicial (Listing) of the Supreme Court refused to register the application, saying that the Supreme Court had not set any definite deadline for the SEBI as per its January 3 judgment and that the Court only said that the investigation should be "preferably" completed within 3 months.

Regarding the other relief sought by Tiwari (that the Union and SEBI should submit a status report on the acceptance of the recommendations of the expert committee on strengthening the stock market regulations), the Registrar stated that the Court had not directed the submission of such a status report. The Registrar also mentioned that the review petition filed against the January judgment had also been dismissed.

Challenging the Registrar's refusal to receive the application, Tiwari filed the instant application. He referred to the Hindenburg report which alleged that the SEBI Chairperson and her spouse had investments in offshore funds linked to Adani companies. Contending that the report created an "atmosphere of doubt", Tiwari said that it became "incumbent for SEBI to conclude the pending investigations and declare the conclusion of the investigations."

He argued that the mere usage of the word "preferably" in the judgment did not mean that the Court did not lay down any categorical direction. "By using the word “preferably” it cannot be understood that no timeline was fixed. When Specifically three months have been mentioned in the order, it is sufficient to be understood as a prudent that a fixed time period is laid down for the completion of the pending investigations," the application stated.

Case Title: VISHAL TIWARI Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., MA 2346/2024 in W.P.(C) No. 162/2023 

Click Here To Read/Download Order