Allegations of Adani Group investigations since 2016 factually baseless: Sebi informs Supreme Court

It added that “the matter referred to” in the reply affidavit of the petitioners “pertains to the issuance of Global Depository Receipts by 51 Indian listed companies in respect of which investigation was conducted” and said, “however, no listed company of Adani Group was part of the…51 companies”.

The Sebi affidavit pointed out that “pursuant to completion of the investigation, appropriate enforcement actions were taken in this matter. Hence, the allegation that it has been “investigating Adani since 2016 is factually baseless” and the “reliance sought to be placed on the investigation pertaining to GDRs is wholly misplaced”.

The market regulator said that “in the context of the investigation into Minimum Public Shareholding, (MPS) norms, SEBI has already approached eleven overseas regulators under the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MMOU) with International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO” and “various request for information was made to these regulators. The first request to overseas Regulators was made as early as on October 6, 2020”.

SEBI pointed out that it had submitted “a detailed note…to the expert committee constituted by” the SC in the wake of the Hindenburg Research report and that it covers “the steps taken, responses, received and the current status of information gathering under the MMOU of IOSCO”.

It said that “in respect of the investigation/examination relating to 12 transactions referred to in the Hindenburg Report prima facie it is noted that these transactions are highly complex and have many such transactions across numerous jurisdictions and a rigorous investigation of these transactions would require collation of data/information from various sources including bank statements from multiple domestic as well as international banks, financial statements of onshore and offshore entities involved in the transactions and contracts and agreements, if any, entered between the entities along with other supporting documents. Therefore, the analysis would have to be conducted on the documents received from various services before conclusive findings can be arrived at”.

The affidavit added that “the application for extension of time filed by Sebi is meant to ensure carriage of justice, keeping in mind the interest of investors and the securities market since any incorrect or premature conclusion of the case is dead without full facts material on record would not serve the ends of justice and hence would be legally untenable”.

Sebi has sought six more months time from the SC to complete its probe into the allegations levelled in the Hindenburg report. Opposing this, one of the petitioners had said that the market regulator had been probing Adani since 2016.