The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a petition filed by advocate ML Sharma seeking an injunction barring the media from covering the Adani-Hindenburg dispute till the court rules on the committee.
“We will not issue an injunction to the media…
“We shall issue our order,” said Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud to Sharma.
Previously, on February 17, the Supreme Court deferred its decision in a batch of four petitions concerning the report issued by short-seller Hindenburg Research alleging fraud on the part of the conglomerate, as a result of which the Adani Group sustained losses in excess of $100 billion.
Sharma, one of the four petitioners, has asked the SEBI and the Union Home Ministry to launch an investigation and file a FIR against Nathan Anderson, the founder of Hindenburg Research, and his collaborators in India.
Sharma has also requested a gag order to prevent media reports on listed businesses from being published unless they are first filed with and vetted by the SEBI.
So far, four PILs on the matter have been filed in the Supreme Court by lawyers Sharma, Vishal Tiwari, Congress leader Jaya Thakur, and Mukesh Kumar, who claims to be a social activist.
Tiwari requested in his Petition that the Centre form a committee led by a former Supreme Court judge to investigate the Hindenburg Research study, which detailed a series of claims against the business group run by tycoon Gautam Adani.
In his petition, Congress leader Thakur has requested that the Adani Group of Companies be investigated under the supervision of a sitting Supreme Court judge in light of the allegations.
The fourth PIL demands a probe by different central government bodies under the supervision of a panel or a retired apex court judge against the Adani Group following allegations of fraud and share price manipulation.
Adani Group shares have plummeted on the bourses after Hindenburg Research levelled a slew of claims against the corporate giant, including illegal transactions and share-price manipulation. The Adani Group has denied the allegations, claiming that it complies with all regulations and disclosure obligations.
(With inputs from PTI)
