The Supreme Court of India recently reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring unbiased investigations in high-profile cases, specifically regarding allegations of share price manipulations against the Adani group by Hindenburg Research. The ruling, delivered by a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud on January 3, emphasized that credible evidence of bias could warrant transferring the investigation to an independent agency or a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The court firmly rejected calls to remove the Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) from overseeing the probe, stating that SEBI’s investigation had inspired confidence and showcased a comprehensive approach. As of the latest updates, SEBI had completed 22 of its 24 investigations but was awaiting additional information before proceeding with the remaining cases.
This ruling has addressed ongoing criticism of SEBI’s handling of the Adani Group case, but controversy reignited following fresh allegations made by Hindenburg against SEBI chairperson Madhabi Buch, accusing her of involvement with offshore entities purportedly linked to the alleged Adani money siphoning scandal.
In response, the Opposition has vocalized concerns over the integrity of SEBI, with prominent figures, including Rahul Gandhi, highlighting the potential compromise in SEBI’s credibility stemming from these accusations.
The Supreme Court underscored its authority under Article 32 and Article 142 of the Constitution to transfer investigations under exceptional circumstances, particularly when faced with overwhelming evidence of bias that could hinder justice. The court noted that merely having accusations against senior officials of the investigating agency could justify the reassignment of a case to maintain public confidence.
Moreover, the Supreme Court indicated a need for scrutiny into the losses faced by Indian investors due to volatility allegedly induced by Hindenburg Research and its affiliates, reinforcing the potential for further investigations into all parties involved in this high-stakes financial controversy.
