Petitioners in the Adani case have filed heir response to SEBI’s status report on the Adani probe. In their response, the petitioners have levelled charges of – inaction, conflict of interest, and dilution of regulations – against Sebi.

Share Market Live

NSE

In their application, the petitioners claim that in January 2014, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) wrote to the then SEBI Chief, UK Sinha, about an ongoing investigation into alleged over-invoicing by Adani group companies during the import of power equipment. They submit that DRI had red-flagged possible stock price manipulation through the overvaluation of imported equipment.

The application expresses shock that SEBI suppressed and concealed information about the DRI alert from the Supreme Court. The petitioners also raise concerns about how SEBI never conducted any investigation based on the DRI findings.

They argue that UK Sinha is currently serving as Non Executive Independent Director Chairperson of NDTV, which was acquired by the Adani Group in 2022.

The petitioners are also making a case of conflict, citing that Cyrill Shroff is on SEBI's Corporate Governance Committee, which looks at offenses like insider trading. They submit that five out of 24 SEBI probes are related to insider trading. The plea argues that since Cyrill Shroff's daughter is married to Gautam Adani's son, there is a clear conflict of interest.

The petitioners also cite the recently released Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) report, claiming that the OCCRP report reveals that Naseer Ali and Chang Chung Ling have traded millions of dollars of Adani Stock behind shell companies. They cite how, as per OCCRP report, Vinod Adani’s firm received advisory fees from Mauritian entities linked to Naseer Ali, Chang Chung Ling.

The petitioner claim that Mauritian entities are fronts for Vinod Adani, and that his holding in Adani stocks breaches Minimum Public Shareholding norms.

The petitioners also slammed SEBI’s changes to FPI regulations and lax provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) 2022, arguing that they have facilitated the hiding of beneficial owners. They claim that frequent amendments to regulations have violated spirit of the SEBI act. According to the petitioners, amendments to regulations have provided a shield and an excuse for Adani.