Adani vs Hindenburg: What happened at the high stake legal battle at the Supreme Court?

New Delhi: In a riveting courtroom showdown, the Adani vs. Hindenburg case has taken center stage at the Supreme Court, leaving the nation on the edge of its seat. With Chief Justice DY Chandrachud leading the bench, the proceedings reached a crucial juncture as the court demanded market regulator SEBI to conclude its investigation in all 24 cases. Let's delve into the intense exchanges and revelations that transpired during this high-stakes legal face-off.

Supreme Court's Directive to SEBI

The Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, dropped a bombshell by instructing market regulator SEBI to wrap up its investigation in all 24 cases related to the Adani-Hindenburg saga. The court emphasized the need for a thorough probe, dismissing the Hindenburg report as an unverified statement of truth.

During the proceedings, the Supreme Court asserted that making allegations requires a sense of responsibility. The court addressed the issue of petitioners claiming that Somsekhar Sundaresan, now a Bombay High Court judge, was once counsel for the Adani Group. The court defended the appointment of industry veterans as judges, emphasizing their expertise in addressing complex issues.

SEBI's Challenge: Disclose Findings or Uphold Secrecy?

A pivotal moment arose when the question of SEBI's findings came into play. The court deliberated whether SEBI could be compelled to disclose its findings before initiating legal proceedings. The judges questioned the reliability of news reports, even from reputable sources like the Financial Times, highlighting the complexity of pre-judging SEBI's investigative outcomes.

Demands for transparency

Petitioners raised compelling arguments, questioning SEBI's ability to access crucial documents compared to journalists. They urged the Supreme Court to consider appointing a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to ensure an impartial inquiry. Allegations surfaced regarding funds managed by Vinod Adani, prompting demands for a reconstitution of the expert committee due to conflicts of interest.

The Solicitor General entered the fray, presenting SEBI's side of the story. Allegations were made against Prashant Bhushan, accusing him of creating a report and presenting it before the Supreme Court, thereby creating a conflict of interest. The Solicitor General shed light on SEBI's interactions with external organizations, revealing challenges in obtaining crucial documents related to the case.

As the Adani vs Hindenburg case unfolds in the Supreme Court, it emerges as a legal battle of unprecedented magnitude. The clash of arguments, accusations, and demands for transparency paints a vivid picture of a case that could potentially reshape the corporate landscape. The nation awaits the verdict that will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications.