SEBI Accused of Concealing DRI Alert on Adani Group: Petitioner Approaches Supreme Court
In a recent development that has sent shockwaves through India’s financial sector, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) finds itself under scrutiny. Anamika Jaiswal, a petitioner, has approached the Supreme Court with a detailed affidavit, alleging that the market regulator concealed a pivotal alert from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) back in 2014. This alert highlighted concerns about over-invoicing and potential stock market manipulation by the Adani Group, which purportedly led to the siphoning off of a staggering ₹2,323 crore.
Jaiswal’s affidavit articulates her astonishment, emphasizing,
“It is shocking that the SEBI has suppressed and concealed this important information from this Hon’ble Court.”
She further points out that SEBI informed the Expert Committee that their investigation into the Adani group’s potential contraventions began only in October 2020, a claim that now stands contested.
But the allegations don’t stop there. The affidavit delves deeper, suggesting a possible ‘conflict of interest’ within SEBI’s investigative ranks. It highlights that Mr. Cyril Shroff, a prominent figure in India’s legal landscape and a member of SEBI’s committee on corporate governance, has direct familial ties with the Adani family. This revelation raises questions about the impartiality and integrity of the investigation.
The plot thickens with revelations from the Organised Crime And Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP). The international watchdog has unearthed documents indicating that two Mauritius-based companies made significant trades in Adani shares between 2013 and 2018. These transactions were allegedly routed through a Bermuda-based fund. Even more intriguing is the discovery that a UAE-based firm, owned by Vinod Adani, received substantial advisory fees from these entities. Internal communications hint at Vinod Adani’s direct involvement in guiding these investments.
International media outlets, including The Guardian, have further stoked the controversy. Reports suggest undisclosed offshore operations in Mauritius, seemingly under the control of Adani associates, which might have been used to bolster the share prices of Adani group companies. There’s growing speculation that associates of the Adani family were discreetly purchasing stock in their own companies during this period.
Lastly, Jaiswal’s affidavit takes aim at SEBI’s regulatory framework, accusing the market regulator of making strategic amendments to shield the Adani group from potential legal repercussions. These amendments, particularly those made to the FPI regulations and SEBI’s LODR, have raised eyebrows and intensified the debate.
As the nation watches closely, the Supreme Court is now tasked with unraveling this intricate web of allegations, determining the veracity of the claims, and ensuring that justice prevails in a case that involves one of India’s most prominent conglomerates and its chief market regulator.
