New Delhi, Feb 14,2023: A Congress leader has moved the Supreme Court seeking probe against Adani Group of companies against the backdrop of Hindenburg report, and also sought probe into the role of the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) and the SBI for allegedly investing “huge amounts of public money” in the FPO of the enterprises.

The plea filed by Jaya Thakur through advocate Varinder Kumar Sharma urged the top court to direct probe against Adani group of companies through chairman and his associates who have swindled lakhs of the crores of public money and money of the government exchequer, by various investigating agencies, i.e. CBI, ED, DRI, CBDT, EIB, NCB, SEBI, RBI, SFIO under the supervision and monitoring of the sitting judge of the apex court.

“To direct the investigating agencies to investigate the role of Respondent No. 11 (LIC) & 12 (SBI) to invest huge amount of public money in the FPO of the Adani Enterprises @ Rs 3200/- per share whereas the prevailing market arte of shares of Adani Enterprises in the secondary market was Rs 1800/- per share approximately,” said the plea.

The plea contended that subsequent to disclosure made by Hindenburg Research report on January 24, the share price of the Adani Group of companies came down drastically and reached to almost 50 per cent of the price prevailing on January 24, in various stock markets in India and abroad, due to which the millions of common men of this country lost more than Rs 10 lakh crore.

The apex court is already hearing two petitions in connection with the Hindenburg report controversy.

On Monday, the Central government informed the Supreme Court that the existing structure, which includes the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) and others agencies, are fully equipped to handle the situation which occurred after Hindenburg report on Adani group, and it would not oppose the court’s suggestion to constitute a committee to strengthen the existing regime.

It stressed that the court could permit it to suggest the remit of that committee with possible suggestions of names of the committee.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud said: “Our instructions are that the existing structure — Sebi and other agencies — are fully equipped not only regime wise but otherwise also, in taking care of the situation.

“However, responding to suggestions which fell from your lordships, the government has no objection in constituting a committee.”

Mehta stressed that the remit of the committee should be very relevant because any unintentional message to the international investors and domestic investors that even a regulator or statutory monitoring authority also needs a monitoring by a committee appointed by the Supreme Court may have some adverse impact on the flow of money.