'Political Reasons': Lokpal Rips Into Complainants In Madhabi Puri Buch Case

Dismissing all allegations against former SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch, the Lokpal had also pulled up the complainants for approaching it with "unclean hands" and for purely political reasons. The anti-corruption body also warned that the complainants' conduct trivialised the process and amounted to "vexatious proceedings", which is potentially punishable under Section 46 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

The complaints had been filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan and former IPS officer Amitabh Thakur.

In its 116-page order dismissing the complaints against the former Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) chief, the Lokpal said they were based "more on presumptions and assumptions and not supported by any verifiable material and do not attract the ingredients of the offences... so as to direct an investigation."

Warning that such conduct trivialised the process, the Lokpal said it amounted to vexatious proceedings which could be punishable. Section 46 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act provides for the prosecution of individuals who file false or frivolous complaints, with penalties including imprisonment of up to a year and a fine of up to Rs 1 lakh. 

Ms Buch had been accused of having investments linked to the Adani Group, quid pro quo disguised as consultancy fees and rental income, undue gains from ICICI Bank employee stock options and a "pretence of recusal" from certain cases.

The Lokpal noted that the complaints, which were filed last year, were essentially based on the report "by a known short seller trader (Hindenburg Research) whose focus was to expose or corner Adani Group of Companies".

The Lokpal order said, "The effectiveness of the investigations and action taken by SEBI against the Adani Group of companies has commended to the Supreme Court. That cannot be reopened directly or indirectly..."

It also said that the Hindenburg report by itself cannot be made the sole basis to escalate action against Ms Buch.

"The complainant(s) being conscious of this position advisedly attempted to articulate allegations independent of the stated report but the analysis of the allegations by us, ended with a finding that the same are untenable, unsubstantiated and bordering on frivolity," it noted.

"The complainant (s) by making such unverified and flimsy or fragile allegations, only to sensationalise or so to say politicise the matter, has inevitably trivialised the process before the Lokpal," the anti-corruption body added.

'Generating Publicity'

The Lokpal also expressed concern over the decision of one complainant decision to publicise the filing of the complaint on social media. This, the order noted, was in clear breach of the confidentiality requirements enshrined in the Lokpal Act and showed that the complaints were filed not with a bona fide intention of seeking justice, but rather to generate publicity.

It was noted that when the media campaign fizzled out due to a lack of interest, the complainants turned to the Lokpal in what appeared to be an attempt to 'keep the issue alive'.