The Supreme Court has been asked to grant SEBI a six-month extension so that it can finish looking into any breaches of regulatory disclosures and securities market regulations by the Adani Group.
Mahua Moitra has chastised the market regulator for this action. The formidable Trinamool Congress MP, who is renowned for being vocal in her criticism of the administration, has said that SEBI is attempting to defend its preferred businessman, Gautam Adani, by giving him time to hide his misdeeds.
When the SEBI responded to her letter from July, she tweeted that they had been looking into the situation since October 2021. Although SEBI can initially detect violations, they are asking for an additional six months to give Adani time to justify his behaviour.
“This is a farce. @SEBI_India has been looking on this since they responded to my letter from July in October 2021. While they initially appear to be in violation (no surprise), they want to give their favourite businessman six months to cover his tracks, she tweeted.
Following a negative report by US short seller Hindenburg Research, the Supreme Court ordered SEBI to conduct an investigation into the situation within two months and established an expert panel to look into the protection of Indian investors.
The Adani Group’s market value was reduced by more than $140 billion as a result of the research. Further inquiries are required, according to SEBI, in cases where preliminary data suggests that securities regulations have been broken.
Jairam Ramesh, a senior member of the Congress, has asked for an investigation by a joint parliamentary committee (JPC), claiming that the expert panel “cannot (and will not want to) investigate the entire political science and business practises of the Group”. He hopes the extension request isn’t an attempt to bury the scam or drag it out in the hopes that the uproar will go away.
The SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch previously declined to comment on the Adani problem during her media appearance in late March since it was a pending legal process, while calling it the “elephant in the room.”