|
The Lokpal of India has questioned the credibility of the Hindenburg report in connection with complaints that seek an investigation into allegations against the SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch.
The complaints allege corruption and quid pro quo involving the SEBI chief and the Adani Group, but the Lokpal has expressed concerns that the complaints were "rushed in" and primarily based on information downloaded from the Hindenburg report. In response, the Lokpal has asked the complainants to provide "verified credible" evidence to support their allegations rather than relying solely on the Hindenburg report. Lokpal said, "The complainant must explain which allegation of impropriety would constitute an offence of corruption within the meaning of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, provision-wise. Further, how can the Lokpal entertain the allegation of quid pro quo or for that matter, failure of meaningful action by SEBI and its complicity, in the teeth of the dictum of the Supreme Court of India in relation to the fair and comprehensive investigations conducted by SEBI in all the twenty-two cases completed by it so far?". Lokpal direction came while hearing two complaints related to allegations against the SEBI Chairperson. "Notably, the Supreme Court not only declined to interfere with the outcome of the already concluded twenty-two investigations conducted by SEBI but also allowed it to continue with the investigations in the remaining two pending cases unconditionally. Moreover, the complainant must clarify how the act of private investments made by the named public servant, before taking over the office as Chairperson of SEBI and/or as Chairperson, would attract the offence of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Furthermore, how will the activities prior to the period specified in Section 53 of the Act of 2013 be reckoned and enquired into/investigated by the Lokpal?," the Lokpal asked. The Lokapal, headed by retired Supreme Court judge AM Khanwilkar, said they have reason to believe that the complainant, without verifying the contents of the stated report and collating credible material, has rushed in his complaint on the same day online. "Further, the complainant has merely reproduced the factual narrative in the stated report. He has not attempted to verify the authenticity of the claim therein, and more so, how it is different from the earlier report of this very author (Hindenburg Research) published on 24.01.2023, which had been duly considered and critically commented upon by the Supreme Court in its decision dated 03.01.2024. In the absence thereof, we may end up entertaining the same subject matter already considered and negatived by the highest court of the land even though the said decision has attained finality consequent to the dismissal of the review petition by the Supreme Court on 15.07.2024, said Lokpal in an order," the Lokapal said. Although the names of the complainants were redacted in the Lokpal's order, it is publicly known that Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra and former IPS officer Amitabh Thakur had filed complaints with the Lokpal, seeking a probe into the SEBI chief. (ANI)
|
