16 SC Judges play the stock markets; 11 out of 21 own Reliance shares

Bar&Bench News Network

Nov 05, 2009

Two of the judges on Reliance matters have recently recused themselves on the grounds of conflict of interest. With the ownership of Reliance shares becoming a matter of some inconvenience to sitting Judges of the Supreme Court, Bar & Bench takes a look at the data revealed by the recent disclosure of assets by 21 Judges of the SC.

The long-running dispute between the Ambani brothers does not appear to have affected the confidence of the judges in the profitability of Reliance enterprises. Out of the 21 sitting Justices, 20 declared their assets on November 2. Justice B.N. Agrawal, who retired on October 15, also voluntarily published his assets on the Supreme Court website.

A study of the published list of assets shows that 16 of the 21 Judges invest in the stock markets directly or indirectly through Mutual Funds and other forms of investment. 

All of the judges with Reliance stocks appear to be long-time shareholders; the pattern of their holding indicates that most of them were holding these shares prior to the demerger of Reliance Industries Limited into Reliance Communication, RNRL, Reliance Energy (which later became Reliance Infrastructure) and Reliance Capital.

Justices R.V. Raveendran, Dalveer Bhandari, D.K. Jain, V.S. Sirpurkar, Aftab Alam, Mukundakam Sharma, H.L. Dattu and B.S. Chauhan have equity investments in both the brothers' companies. Justice Panchal holds an equity investment only in Mukesh Ambani-controlled Reliance Petroleum. Justices Katju and Ganguly hold mutual fund investments through the Anil Ambani-controlled Reliance Capital. Justices Kapadia, Tarun Chatterjee, R.M. Lodha, Deepak Verma, Cyriac Joseph and B.N. Agrawal hold stocks and mutual funds of various other financial institutions.

Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, along with Justices Altamas Kabir, Sudershan Reddy, Sathasivam and G.S. Singhvi do not hold shares or stocks in any company whatsoever.

Whatever may be the case, Reliance investments have returned more than 100 percent in the last 5 years, and Reliance stocks remain a good investment decision.

 

Add to My Clips Print this Story Email this Story

 

Facebook LinkedIn MySpace Digg Del.icio.us twitter

Comments(1)
  • 1. "I think, it would be too much to ask any one not to invest its own money for his/her future. Judiciary can be no exception. It is just that when one has too many shares running into several thousands or their investments run in lakhs that should be cause of conflict of interest. Having 100 or 200 shares may mean nothing but if its something like 10,000 or more or the amount runs into lakhs then it means a lot. Conflict of interest should come when the stakes are substantial and not some petty amount. ". Ravi Avasthi, Delhi
Post Your Comment

Name* :

Location :

Email Id :

Comment * :

Notify me when there is a comment


 

The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?

bullets

 

May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the  comments (4)

 

 

Thank you. Comments are subject to moderation.