The Bombay High Court refused a plea seeking a court-monitored probe against Adani Green Energy Limited, calling it misuse of process. The bench held allegations lacked prompt, independent evidence to justify directing a Central Bureau of Investigation inquiry.
MUMBAI: In a notable judgment, the Bombay High Court refused to entertain a petition requesting a court-supervised probe into alleged bribery by Adani Green Energy Limited, finding the petition to be a misuse of the judicial process. The ruling underscores the court’s caution when allegations are unsupported by prompt or independent evidence.
A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Suman Shyam heard the matter. Petitioner Jitendra P. Maru sought directions for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging that Adani Green Energy and its associates paid large bribes to obtain solar power contracts in several Indian states.
ALSO READ: “Gautam Adani Charged for Securities Fraud Conspiracy”: Adani Green
Much of the material relied upon by the petitioner came from U.S. proceedings, including a criminal indictment and regulatory actions pending in a federal court in New York. The petitioner contended those documents exposed a coordinated scheme of unlawful payments to officials tied to power purchase agreements.
The High Court, however, was unconvinced. It observed that the petition depended largely on foreign proceedings and media reports and did not present independent or contemporaneous evidence to Indian authorities. The Bench also pointed out a considerable delay in bringing the matter to court, despite the alleged actions occurring years earlier.
The Court emphasized that “merely making allegations does not entitle a petitioner to demand a criminal investigation.” It found the writ petition did not establish adequate grounds for invoking the Court’s extraordinary jurisdiction. As a result, the Bench described the plea as an “abuse of the process of the Court” and dismissed it.
The decision reaffirms a broader judicial principle that courts should not be used as venues for speculative or belated claims, particularly when those claims are primarily premised on foreign proceedings rather than substantiated domestic evidence. It also underscores that investigative action cannot be triggered solely by unverified allegations.
More broadly, the ruling highlights the difficulties posed by transnational allegations in corporate and regulatory disputes. While foreign investigations and legal proceedings may carry persuasive weight, Indian courts require credible, legally admissible material before directing domestic investigative agencies to act.
In sum, the Bombay High Court’s judgment serves as a reminder that the integrity of judicial process must be protected by ensuring litigation rests on genuine grievances supported by concrete evidence. The dismissal not only spares Adani Green Energy Limited further legal entanglement in this matter but also reiterates the limits of judicial intervention where substantive foundation is lacking.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE