New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday witnessed another twist in the public interest litigation (PIL) targeting Vedanta group companies. Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar recused himself from hearing the matter, saying he would not be part of the bench dealing with the allegations of financial fraud raised by U.S.-based short-seller Viceroy Research LLC. The move means the case will now wait for fresh allocation by the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
Background
The PIL, filed by Delhi-based petitioner Shakti Bhatia, presses for a probe by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the Reserve Bank of India, and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Bhatia alleges that Vedanta Limited, Hindustan Zinc Limited, and Vedanta Resources Limited manipulated share prices and violated market rules. His plea draws heavily from a July 2025 report by Viceroy Research, a Delaware-based firm known for exposing corporate misdeeds. According to the petition, Viceroy had already flagged its findings to Indian regulators, but “no proactive steps have been taken so far.”
Read also: Supreme Court Upholds Delhi HC Ruling: Cheque Bounce Notice Invalid If Amount Differs from Cheque
This is not the first time the case has hit a procedural snag. Earlier, when the matter came up before a bench led by CJI B.R. Gavai, Justice K. Vinod Chandran had also stepped aside, explaining that he had professional ties with the law firm representing SEBI.
Court’s Observations
When the matter was called, Justice Sanjay Kumar kept it brief. “I am not inclined to hear this petition,” he said, without elaborating on specific reasons. His co-judge, Justice Alok Aradhe, immediately recorded the statement and noted, “The bench observed, ‘List the matter subject to orders of the Hon’ble Chief Justice before a bench of which Justice Sanjay Kumar is not a part.’”
The courtroom remained quiet after the announcement. Lawyers for the petitioner nodded, understanding that a fresh roster would now be awaited. Officials representing SEBI and other government respondents did not raise objections and agreed to the administrative direction.
Decision
In a short order, the bench directed the Supreme Court registry to place the file before the CJI for reallocation. No timeline was specified, but the matter will return only after a new bench is named. With two judges having recused so far, the petitioner’s wait for a substantive hearing continues.
Case: Shakti Bhatia v. Union of India & Others – Vedanta Fraud Allegation PIL
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 832/2025
Petitioner: Shakti Bhatia
Respondents: Union of India, SEBI, RBI, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Vedanta group entities
