Sammaan Capital Ltd’s shares slumped sharply on Wednesday after the Supreme Court reportedly delivered stinging criticism against multiple investigative agencies for what it described as a 'friendly approach' in the probe into alleged financial irregularities and suspected money laundering involving the company, formerly known as Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. Sammaan Capital closed at Rs159.75 on the BSE, down 12.47% and nearly 19% below its 52-week high of Rs192.90.
During a hearing packed with pointed observations, a bench of justice Surya Kant, justice Ujjal Bhuyan and justice NK Singh questioned central bureau of investigation (CBI), the Union ministry of corporate affairs (MCA) and market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for their slow, inconsistent and 'over-cautious' handling of the case. The Court expressed concern about the pace of the inquiry and noted that the agencies did not appear eager to move forward, despite the seriousness of the allegations they had been presented with.
Justice Kant criticised CBI for its casual handling of the case, saying, “Very surprisingly, CBI has a very cool kind of attitude in this case. We have never seen such a friendly attitude by CBI as in this case. This is ultimately public money. There is a strong element of public interest. Even if 10% allegations are correct, there are still large-scale transactions which can be dubbed as dubious.”
The Bench then questioned MCA on why it had not ordered an investigation despite the SEBI report clearly raising concerns, especially since public funds were involved. Justice Kant asked whether the Ministry had any hidden reason for not taking action, saying, “Why is the MCA indulging in closing the matter like this? What is their interest in this?”
The judges made it clear that the MCA’s stance should not stop other agencies from doing their job. As Justice Kant put it, “The investigating agencies should not sit idle on the plea that we can’t do anything because the ministry has closed it.”
SEBI also came under strong criticism after it hesitated to join a coordinated investigation. The Court pointed out that SEBI often claims exclusive powers when it comes to selling assets, but steps back when asked to investigate. Justice Kant says, “When a question of taking over someone’s property comes, SEBI says we are the only authority in the country and we have the jurisdiction. But when the question of investigation comes, you say you don’t want to do it? Your officers have some vested interest? When we are giving you jurisdiction to do investigation why are you reluctant? Everyday we see double standard of SEBI. In one of the matters where I constituted a high powered sale committee your stand was only SEBI has the right to auction all these properties. And what have you been auctioning? We know that very well. A property worth ₹30 crore you sold for ₹2 lakh. Why are your officers getting salaries if you don’t have power?”
In a significant step, the Supreme Court pressed CBI to file a first information report (FIR), remarking that doing so would enable the directorate of enforcement (ED) to deepen its investigation into possible money laundering. The Court has also sought CBI’s explanation for failing to lodge an FIR so far, signalling that leniency or indecision would not be tolerated.
ED told the Court that it would convene a joint meeting with CBI, SEBI and serious fraud investigation office (SFIO) within two weeks. The coordination meeting, it says, would streamline information flow and avoid the delays that have characterised the case to date. The agency also pointed out that complaints filed earlier with the economic offences wings (EOW) in Delhi and Mumbai 'saw no cognisance', adding to the lag in progress.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for 17 December 2025, directing all four agencies—CBI, ED, SEBI and SFIO—to present clear updates on their investigation status and concrete steps planned ahead, says a
report from Moneycontrol.
The judges indicated that the matter will now face closer judicial monitoring, and agencies will be expected to justify their actions as well as their inaction.
The strong judicial intervention triggered a sharp reaction in the markets, with Sammaan Capital’s shares falling nearly 13.5% intraday to ₹159.55 before settling slightly up.
In a statement, senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi representing Sammaan Capital says, the company has no defaults, no outstanding dues and no investigations or proceedings pending before any regulatory or enforcement agency, including SEBI, RBI, MCA, or CBI.
"The present petition before the Supreme Court does not contain any allegation against Sammaan Capital. The Court has referred to concerns raised about the previous promoter, Sameer Gehlaut, who has no shareholding or involvement in the company today. The Court has clarified in its order that it has made no observations on the merits of these allegations and has merely permitted the authorities to re-examine the matter," Mr Rohtagi added.
SEBI needs to be purged and straightened out.