Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Probe Into Overseas Funds Flowing Into Indian Equities, Adani Deals
The plea also seeks disclosure of public sector bank exposure of over ₹100 crore to corporate borrowers, as well as loans written off by public sector banks.
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a PIL seeking a probe into alleged routing and rerouting of funds through overseas entities into the Indian equity market, including transactions involving Adani Group entities.
The petition also sought disclosure of public sector bank exposure exceeding ₹100 crore to corporate houses and related entities. It sought details of loans written off by PSU banks, including ₹17,495 crore referred to in the petition as having been disclosed by Bank of Baroda.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana declined to entertain the petition.
The Bench noted that a review petition against a Bombay High Court order was pending and asked the petitioner to pursue the review proceedings there.
“The review petition against the Bombay High Court order is pending. Please pursue your review. If you are not happy, come up,” the Court said.
Appearing for the petitioner, counsel submitted that the PIL concerned the alleged “unregulated offshore fund centring in equities through interconnected entities.”
Counsel submitted that the petitioner was seeking relief directly from the Supreme Court under Article 32.
“We are seeking relief under Article 32, Your Lordships. This Court has the jurisdiction to entertain,” counsel said.
Counsel further submitted that the petitioner had been granted liberty to approach the Supreme Court. He disputed the Bench's observation that the matter was pending before the Bombay High Court.
“It is not pending in the Bombay High Court. We were granted liberty to file in this Court,” counsel said.
Counsel referred to the proceedings dated June 15, 2026. He sought to explain the status of the review petition arising from the Bombay High Court order.
The bench, however, reiterated that the petitioner should first pursue the pending review.
The petition, filed by Ketan Tirodkar, an ex-journalist, states that the petitioner has been studying funds allegedly flowing into the Indian equity market for the past 15 years. It refers to information and documents obtained from overseas company registries and Indian authorities.
The petitioner alleges that companies registered in Singapore, Cyprus, the UK, Dubai, Mauritius and other jurisdictions are being used to route and reroute funds to and from India. The petition also refers to transactions involving Adani Group entities and overseas investment entities.
Among its prayers, the petition seeks status reports from the Department of Economic Affairs and SEBI. It also seeks statements of relevant persons through the enforcement wings of the Financial Intelligence Unit, SEBI's Vigilance Cell, RBI's Vigilance Cell and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office.
The petitioner also seeks a status report from the Ministry of External Affairs on the beneficiaries and sources of investment funds in the companies and entities referred to in the petition. It asks the RBI to disclose PSU bank exposure exceeding ₹100 crore per borrower, including related entities, along with defaults and securities furnished for such borrowings.
The petition also seeks disclosure of loans written off by PSU banks. It refers to a Bank of Baroda disclosure of ₹17,495 crore in written-off loans.
The petition further seeks disclosure of advances and credit facilities extended by banks against share-pledge agreements. It also seeks preliminary inquiries by the CBI, ED, and SFIO into the information and documents relied upon by the petitioner.
The petitioner seeks a direction to invoke Section 216 of the Companies Act, 2013. It also seeks a report on whether the material warrants registration of FIRs or complaints under various laws.
The petition additionally seeks details of an investigation being conducted by the Netherlands Police. It asks the authorities to examine companies sharing common addresses, email addresses and directors.
The petition also seeks the constitution of a study group headed by a retired Supreme Court judge. It proposes that the group examine shortcomings identified by the petitioner in the functioning of the concerned agencies and suggest reforms.
The top court has dismissed the petition. The petitioner was directed to pursue the pending review proceedings before the Bombay High Court and approach the Supreme Court thereafter if necessary.