Pages

Wednesday, January 3, 2024

Adani-Hindenburg case verdict: Gautam Adani responds after SC refuses to transfer SEBI probe to SIT Read more at: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com Jan 3, 2024

 

Gautam Adani, chief of the Adani Group, said that the group's "humble contribution to India's growth story will continue" after the Supreme Court asked the markets regulator SEBI to finish its probe in three months while refusing to transfer the probe on allegations by Hindenburg Research to a SIT or any other probe agency.

"The Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgement shows that truth has prevailed. Satyameva Jayate. I am grateful to those who stood by us. Our humble contribution to India's growth story will continue. Jai Hind," Adani said on social media platform X, previously known as Twitter.

Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud led a bench that declared it could not regulate SEBI's investigative authority, pointing out that the agency has concluded its investigation in 22 of the 24 instances involving claims made against the Adani Group.

The top court further concluded that the case's facts did not support giving the investigation over to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or other investigative body.


The top court on Wednesday pronounced a decision on a number of petitions pertaining to the Adani-Hindenburg case, which involved claims that the Indian conglomerate had manipulated stock prices.

While pronouncing the verdict, the CJI said the the power of the top court to enter the regulatory domain of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) was limited.

Shares of 10-listed Adani Group companies pared some of their initial gains following the verdict with Adani Enterprises’ shares up 3.6 per cent in trade. The stock had risen 9.1 per cent during the day to its highest level in more than 11 months.

The SC in March directed SEBI to look into Hindenburg's claims. A six-person expert group led by AM Sapre was also established to determine whether any regulatory violations had occurred. In May, the panel declared that there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about regulatory shortcomings and that the company had not manipulated stock prices.


No comments:

Post a Comment