...
The SEBI, as investigative agency of the Union government, shall probe into whether the loss suffered by Indian investors due to the conduct of the Hindenburg research and any other entities in taking short position involved any infraction of law, and if so, suitable action shall be taken.
CJI : Before concluding, public interest jurisprudence was developed to provide access to ordinary citizens...petitions which lack adequate research and rely on unsubstantiated reports cannot be accepted...
CJI : Reliance on newspaper reports and third party organisations to question the statutory regulator does not inspire confidence. They can be treated as inputs but not conclusive evidence to doubt SEBI probe.
CJI : The power to transfer investigation must be exercised in exceptional circumstances. Such powers cannot be exercised in the absence of cogent justifications.
Supreme Court rejects the arguments of petitioners regarding conflict of interest on the part of the members of the Expert Committee.
CJI : The Govt of India and SEBI shall take into consideration the recommendations of the committee to strengthen interest of the Indian investors.
CJI : The Govt of India and the Sebi to look into if there is any infraction of law by the #Hindenburg report on short selling and if so, take action in accordance with law.
CJI : The reliance on OCCPR report is rejected and reliance on a third party organisation report without any verification cannot be relied upon as a proof.
CJI : There is no ground to to transfer the probe in this case from SEBI.
#SupremeCourt says that the report of OCCPR cannot be taken into account to doubt the SEBI investigation.
CJI : SEBI has completed investigation in 22 out of 24 matters. Taking into account the assurance of Solicitor General, we direct the SEBI to complete the investigation in the other two cases within 3 months.
#SupremeCourt holds that there is no ground to transfer the investigation from SEBI to SIT.
CJI : A. The power of this court to enter the regulatory framework of SEBI is limited.
B. No valid grounds raised to direct SEBI to revoke its amendments on FPI and LODR regulations. The regulations do not suffer from any infirmities. The FPI Regulations and LODR Regulations have been tightened by the amendments in question.
The bench assembles.
CJI : I will read out the conclusions.