Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Bombay High Court Order Dismissing Plea Against WeWork India IPO

The Supreme Court recently refused to interfere with the Bombay High Court's decision dismissing a challenge to the Initial Public Offering (IPO) of WeWork India Management Pvt Ltd.

A Bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by Hemant Kulshrestha, who had alleged deficiencies in disclosures in the offer documents relating to WeWork India IPO.

The petition arose from a judgment dated 1 December 2025 of the Bombay High Court, which had rejected writ petitions alleging inadequate and misleading disclosures in the Draft Red Herring Prospectus and Red Herring Prospectus of WeWork India.

Kulshreshta had contended before the High Court that material information, including details of criminal proceedings against the promoters of WeWork India, had not been properly disclosed, and sought directions to the Securities and Exchange Board of India to conduct an investigation.

The High Court, however, had held that the disclosures were adequate and that SEBI's role is limited to ensuring disclosure rather than evaluating the merits of an IPO.

Challenging this, the Kulshreshta approached the Supreme Court.

However, the top court declined to entertain the plea, stating:

“We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.”

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition.

For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, Advocates Sanchit Singh, Sarthak Gupta, Kaustubh Khanna, and Shraddha Deshmukh, AOR

For Respondents: Senior Advocate Darius Khambata, Advocates Ritin Rai, Ravitej Chilumuri, Aishwarya Singh, Sanya Gandhi, M/s Khaitan & Co, Shruti Sabharwal, Anant Narayan Misra and S. S. Shroff, AOR