Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Probe Into Overseas Funds Flowing Into Indian Equities, Adani Deals

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by former journalist Ketan Tirodkar seeking an investigation into alleged overseas fund flows into the Indian equity market, including transactions involving Adani Group entities.

A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana at the outset, questioned why the petitioner had approached the Supreme Court directly instead of pursuing the remedy available before the Bombay High Court, particularly when similar petitions had been filed before that court.

“Why you can't go to High Court, instead of coming here. What prevents you go to the High Court. The same relief you could seek from the High court also.", the CJI asked.

When counsel pointed out that the petitioner had withdrawn the proceedings before the Bombay High Court, the Bench questioned the decision to approach the Supreme Court despite the availability of an alternative remedy.

"Why you have withdrawn, this is what we want to know. When a remedy which is available to you, you don't want to avail and a remedy which you should ordinarily come after availing the High Court. Therefore we want to know."

Counsel for Tirodkar submitted that the petition raised issues of national importance and sought additional time to explain how it differed from similar petitions filed before the Bombay High Court.

“Your Lordships, it is about the Indian revenue. It is a matter of national interest, so we are approaching here.”

Counsel further submitted, "This issue is a very... it has a very big national importance, and the documents that we have put are very much crucial and comprehensive, Your Lordships. Your Lordship may give me one little more time just to file a summary of the reports there.”

Counsel also referred to the involvement of central agencies in the matter and sought time to place the relevant pleadings and orders on record, explaining that an order had been uploaded only the previous evening.

The Bench however, questioned the need to approach the Supreme Court instead of pursuing the remedy before the High Court.

“Nothing is involved except that you have to file the bona fide petition in the High Court, that's all. Instead of coming here...”

Ultimately the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition and gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional high court.

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 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.