Tag: PIL

  • PIL in SC seeks prosecution of short sellers for ‘artificial’ crashing of Adani Group’s stock value

    PIL in SC seeks prosecution of short sellers for ‘artificial’ crashing of Adani Group’s stock value

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court, seeking the prosecution of short seller Nathan Anderson of US-based firm Hindenburg Research and his associates in India and the US, for allegedly exploiting innocent investors and the “artificial crashing” of the Adani Group’s stock value in the market.

    Hindenburg engages in activist short selling, which involves selling borrowed stocks with the hope of buying the same at a lower price later. If the prices fall on the expected lines, the short sellers make a killing.

    The investment research firm, which invests its own capital, takes such bets based on its research, which looks for “man-made disasters” such as accounting irregularities, mismanagement, and undisclosed related-party transactions.

    The public interest litigation (PIL) matter filed by advocate ML Sharma also seeks directions for declaring short selling an offense of fraud against the investors, to be prosecutable under section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), read with the provisions of the SEBI Act.

    Sharma told PTI that his PIL has been registered and numbered by the apex court registry.

    The PIL seeks the court’s directions for the registration of an FIR, recovery of the short sellers’ turnover, their prosecution to protect the citizens of India and further action against them for “duping the Indian share market and innocent investors for their vested interest to provide complete justice”.

    In his petition, Sharma has said being the regulatory body in the stock and commodity market, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is responsible for a control over the share market and the suspension of trading in which stocks have been oversold or they did a short sale.

    According to the PIL, the cause to file the petition arose to the petitioner on January 25, when despite having prior information, the SEBI did not suspend trading qua the Adani Group shares and allowed the short sellers to crash the share market artificially and square up their short-selling position at the lowest rate by “butchering/exploiting” innocent Indian investors in violation of laws.

    The shares of Adani Group firms continued to remain weak for the seventh day running on Friday amid a host of negative events surrounding the companies. The stocks of Adani Enterprises tumbled 20 percent to Rs 1,173.55, the lowest in a year, on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE).

    The Adani Group stocks have taken a beating on the bourses after Hindenburg Research made a litany of allegations in a report, including fraudulent transactions and share-price manipulation, against the business conglomerate led by industrialist Gautam Adani.

    The Adani Group has dismissed the charges as lies, saying it complies with all laws and disclosure requirements.

    [ad_2]
    #PIL #seeks #prosecution #short #sellers #artificial #crashing #Adani #Groups #stock

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Amicus Curiae appointed for PIL on illegal religious structures

    Amicus Curiae appointed for PIL on illegal religious structures

    [ad_1]

    Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has appointed senior advocate Vikram Huilagol as amicus curiae in the public interest litigation (PIL) it has initiated against illegal religious structures on public land.

    The division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Ashok S Kinagi heard the PIL on Wednesday. It took cognisance of the case after a Supreme Court direction to remove all unauthorised religious structures from public properties.

    The State had submitted an affidavit before the court stating that 1,563 unauthorised religious structures have been removed so far. Another 457 have been retained and 48 of them have been relocated. Only 17 structures have been regularised.

    The HC noted that a large number of interim applications have been filed in the PIL and each one had to be studied. It directed the Amicus Curiae to prepare a new list of the unauthorised structures taking into account the structures that the State has dropped from its initial list.

    The State was directed to provide all relevant documents to the Amicus Curiae and the matter was adjourned by three weeks.

    The Supreme Court through an order on September 29, 2009 directed removal of all unauthorised religious structures from public places.

    Following this, the HC in its order on September 5, 2019 directed the State to submit its action-taken-report on the SC order. The State has been submitting updated reports at regular intervals.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Amicus #Curiae #appointed #PIL #illegal #religious #structures

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • PIL filed in SC challenging Centre’s decision to ban BBC documentary

    PIL filed in SC challenging Centre’s decision to ban BBC documentary

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court against the Centre’s decision to “ban” a BBC documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots in the country, alleging it was “malafide, arbitrary and unconstitutional”.

    The PIL filed by advocate ML Sharma also urged the apex court to call and examine the BBC documentary – both parts I and II – and sought action against persons who were responsible and were involved directly and indirectly with the 2002 Gujarat riots.

    Sharma said that in his PIL he has raised a constitutional question and the top court has to decide whether citizens have the right under Article 19 (1) (2) to see news, facts and reports on the 2002 Gujarat riots.

    He has sought direction to quash the order dated January 21, 2023 of the Ministry of the Information and Broadcasting, terming it as illegal, malafide, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

    His plea said whether the central government can curtail freedom of press which is a fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (2) of the Constitution.

    “Whether without having an Emergency declared under Article 352 of the Constitution of India by the president, Emergency provisions can be invoked by the central government?” the PIL said.’

    It claimed the BBC documentary has “recorded facts” which are also “evidence” and can be used to further the cause of justice for the victims.

    On January 21, the Centre issued directions for blocking multiple YouTube videos and Twitter posts sharing links to the controversial BBC documentary “India: The Modi Question”, according to sources.

    [ad_2]
    #PIL #filed #challenging #Centres #decision #ban #BBC #documentary

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )