A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court on Tuesday seeking review of its January 3 verdict by which it refused to transfer the probe into allegations of stock price manipulation by the Adani group to a special investigation team or the CBI.

In a significant win for Adani, the apex court had declined to order a CBI or SIT probe and said in its judgment that market regulator Sebi was conducting a “comprehensive investigation” into the allegations and its conduct “inspires confidence”.

The petition claimed there were “mistakes and errors” in the judgment, and in light of certain new material that had been received by counsel for the petitioner, there were sufficient reasons for a review of the verdict.

The review petition has been filed by Anamika Jaiswal, who was one of the five who had filed PIL against Adani before the apex court.

Jaiswal has claimed at least 16 grounds, some of which are new evidence, warranting review of the judgment.

The massive 816-page review petition filed through advocate Neha Rathi alleged multiple regulatory failures requiring a fresh look at the allegations against the Adani group.

The petitioner said new documents and evidence, including email communications, reveal Adani group companies have been in flagrant violation of Rule 19A of Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules 1957.

“The modus operandi for the same involved funds being invested by Chang Chung Ling and Nasser Ali Shaban Ahli on behalf of Vinod Adani, a member of the Adani promoter group, into stocks of Adani Group companies through Global Opportunities Fund, Emerging India Focus Funds and Emerging Market Resurgence Fund. Of these, Emerging India Focus Fund and Emerging Market Resurgence Fund also find mention among the 13 suspected companies as mentioned in the expert committee report,” the plea said.

“This Hon’ble Court failed to appreciate that DRI (Directorate of Revenue Intelligence) vide letter dated January 2014, had written to Sebi pointing out that siphoned out money using over and under-invoicing from tax havens was being invested by Adani in Adani Group stocks in India. The letter contained two notes and one CD with evidence of the same,” the review plea alleged.

The petition said the FPI Regulations were not continuously “tightened” by Sebi, which it claimed in its affidavit of July 10, 2023.

Sebi’s master circular on Anti Money Laundering Standards and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) issued in February 2010 had a categorical definition of “beneficial ownership”.

The SC had delivered its verdict on a batch of petitions on the Adani-Hindenburg Research row over allegations of stock price manipulation by the Adani group.