Adani-Hindenburg case: Can all good men be conflicted?
Mumbai, The intervention application filed by one Anamika Jaiswal alleging conflcits of interests of the Expert committee members appointed by the Hon. Supreme Court in the Adani – Hindenburg matter, viz. Mr. OP Bhatt, Mr. KV Kamath and Mr. Somasekar Sundaresan, is to the say the least, misconceived and motivated. Whatever the interventionist has gathered is from public sources, and this raises the question as to why such intervention was not sought at the time of appointment of the Expert committee raises doubts about the motives of the applicant.
Further these matters referred in the application are decades old. For instance Mr Somasekar Sundaresan appeared as a Lawyer in 2006-07 in a matter handled by the Law firm JSA Associates, with which he was associated that time. In legal world, conflicts arise when a counsel appears for a party and opposes the party in the same matter; we see senior counsels appearing for opposite sides, in different matters. therefore to say that Mr. Somasekar was conflicted is incorrect. Various lawyers opined that counsels regularly appear for and against parties; the parties are not the clients of the counsels, which has not been appreciated by the applicant.
As regards Mr. Bhat and Mr. kamath, there are no charges filed against them and it is mischievous to say that they are conflicted.
(An Asiaconverge report)
