Adani-Hindenburg row: SC quashes plea seeking review of Jan 3 verdict

The plea said Sebi had only updated the court about the status of its 24 investigations after the allegations, without disclosing any details of action taken

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the review of its January 3 judgment when it refused to transfer the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s (Sebi’s) investigation into allegations against the Adani group by Hindenburg Research either to a special investigation team (SIT) or the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). 

“Having perused the review petition, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed,” the Bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra said. 

The review petition was filed by one Anamika Jaiswal, who was also one of the petitioners in the main case.

It claimed that there were “mistakes and errors” in the judgment and that new material received by the petitioner's advocate, Prashant Bhushan, provided sufficient reasons for a review of the verdict.

The plea said there were “apparent errors” on the face of the impugned order dated January 3, 2024, wherein this court rejected the petitioner's prayer to constitute a court-monitored SIT probe into the massive fraud involving market manipulation through offshore entities owned by promoters of Adani group. Hence, the impugned judgment is liable to be reviewed.  

The plea also said Sebi had only updated the court about the status of its 24 investigations after the allegations, without disclosing any details of action taken.

The court, in January, had directed the markets regulator to conclude its remaining two investigations in the matter within three months.

The court also asked Sebi and the Centre to investigate whether “the loss suffered by Indian investors due to the conduct of Hindenburg Research and any other entities in taking short position involved any infraction of law.”

In addition, the petitioner had requested that Sebi must be directed to revoke the amendment made to its LODR Regulations, which have altered the definition of “related party”.

“We find that the prayer seeking directions to Sebi to revoke its amendments to the FPI Regulations and LODR Regulations must fail,” the court had said. 

Sebi faces a contempt plea in the Supreme Court for failing to complete its investigation into the Adani-Hindenburg matter within the court’s time-frame. 

“Despite a deadline given to Sebi, it has failed to comply with the direction of this court and has not submitted the final conclusion/report as per the directions of the court. By the order of May 17, 2023, the court directed Sebi to submit its report by August 14, 2023,” stated the application filed by advocate Vishal Tiwari, who is also the petitioner. 

The order junking the review petition was passed in May but uploaded on July 15. 

Taking stock

> The January 3 judgement refused to transfer Sebi’s investigation into allegations against the Adani group by Hindenburg Research either to a special investigation team or CBI

> The petition claimed that there were ‘mistakes and errors’ in the judgement 

> It also said Sebi only updated the status of 24 investigations without disclosing any details