The Lokpal has dismissed three corruption complaints against Madhabi Puri Buch, former Chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), ruling that no prima facie case existed to justify an investigation. The decision was issued in a common order dated May 28, 2025, by a bench led by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, along with Justices L. Narayana Swamy, Sanjay Yadav, Sushil Chandra, Ritu Raj Awasthi, and Ajay Tirkey.
Read also: Supreme Court Grants Interim Bail to Odisha IAS Officer Manish Agarwal Upon Surrender in Case Linked
The complaints, filed by multiple individuals including Lok Sabha MP Mahua Moitra, were dated August 13, September 11, and October 8, 2024. The order stated:
"The Complainant(s), by making such unverified and flimsy or fragile allegations, only to sensationalize or politicize the matter, have trivialized the process before the Lokpal. It is nothing short of vexatious proceedings actionable under Section 46 of the Act of 2013. We say no more."
The Lokpal granted Buch the liberty to pursue legal action against the complainants for illegally accessing her income tax records and making them public:
"At the outset, the RPS (respondent public servant – Buch) is right in appealing to us to proceed against the Complainant in the third Complaint in particular and against the other Complainant(s), for an action under the Income Tax Act for surreptitiously obtaining copies of her Income Tax returns and also aggravating the matter by making it public, invading her privacy."
The complaints were largely based on the Hindenburg Research report dated August 10, 2024, which accused Buch and her husband of having stakes in offshore funds allegedly linked to a money scandal involving the Adani Group. However, the Lokpal found these claims speculative and lacking evidence.
Read also: Supreme Court Orders Registry to Hold TDR Certificates for Bangalore Palace Acquisition
Key allegations included Buch’s investment in Global Dynamic Opportunities Fund Ltd. (GDOF), consultancy earnings of her husband Dhaval Buch from Mahindra Group and Blackstone, rental income from a Wockhardt-linked entity, and encashment of ICICI Bank ESOPs.
Buch clarified that the GDOF investment was made in 2015 and fully redeemed in 2018, predating her SEBI involvement. The Lokpal agreed, finding no proof of conflict of interest or wrongdoing.
Regarding the consultancy allegations, the Lokpal noted that decisions in SEBI were made by independent panels, and Buch had recused herself from cases involving her husband's consultancy clients. It concluded the consultancy income was legitimate and not linked to any SEBI decisions.
On the Wockhardt-linked rental income, the Lokpal observed that the lease was signed in 2015, years before any Wockhardt settlement with SEBI, and that Buch had no involvement in the settlement process:
"The allegation is an attribution even about the integrity and capabilities of a retired High Court Judge, who chaired the High-Powered Committee on Settlements. Thus, it is preposterous to even suggest that the RPS could have been able to influence the passing of settlement order concerning Wockhardt."
The ICICI Bank ESOP encashment, amounting to ₹16.18 crore, was also found to be unrelated to SEBI’s settlement orders, as the ESOPs were granted during Buch’s tenure at ICICI Bank, prior to her SEBI role.
"It is too much to assume that the stock options granted to an officer by ICICI Bank upto 2011, can be used to allege quid pro quo attributable to him/her (RPS) years after superannuation in 2013 and connecting it to some remote settlement orders passed in 2019-2021."
In conclusion, the Lokpal ruled that none of the complaints disclosed offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The complaints were deemed speculative and based on assumptions, failing to provide any verifiable evidence.
"We need to record that the complaint(s) under consideration were essentially founded on the Hindenburg Report dated 10.08.2024, by a known short seller trader whose focus was to expose or corner Adani Group of Companies... the analysis of the allegations by us, ended with a finding that the same are untenable, unsubstantiated and bordering on frivolity."
Mahua Moitra was represented by Advocate Prashant Bhushan, while Madhabi Puri Buch was represented by Senior Advocate Arvid P. Datar, with assistance from Advocates Amarjit Singh Bedi, Surekha Raman, and Srisatya Mohanty.
Case no. – 186, 188 and 222/2024
