Corporate Behaviour and Free Speech

102% rise in average cost of electricity purchased from Adani Power between 2021 & 2022  https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/adani-power-gujarat-govt-rise-in-cost-of-electricity-8479214/ There has been a 102 per cent increase in the average cost of electricity bought by the Gujarat government from Adani Power during the calendar years 2021 and 2022, the state legislature was informed Saturday.

During this two-year period, the cost of one unit of electricity bought from Adani Power increased from Rs 2.83 in January 2021 to Rs 8.83 per unit in December 2022, the state government said in a written reply to a question raised by Hemant Ahir, an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA from Jamjodhpur, during the Question Hour.

Adani & Modi के खेल का सबूत अमेरिकी अदालत में पेश!  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M04ixXF6HYc 

US SEC says Modi govt has not delivered bribery case summons to Adani Group https://www.thenewsminute.com/news/us-sec-says-modi-govt-has-not-delivered-bribery-case-summons-to-adani-group  The US cases emerge from the fact that between December 2019 and July 2020, the government-run SECI, a Navratna PSU, awarded tenders to the Adani Group and Azure Power to supply 12 gigawatts of solar-generated electricity at a specified price. 

अडानी मामले पर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के आदेश में किन बातों का जिक्र? Expert Committee कौन हैं शामिल? vMar 4, 2023. While hearing the Adani case, the Supreme Court has ordered SEBI to investigate the entire matter. An expert committee has been constituted. Which will find out whether India's regulatory framework is in place or not? If not well then what kind of improvement is needed? Both SEBI and the Expert Committee will have to submit their reports within 2 months. The expert committee will submit its report to the Supreme Court in a sealed envelope. In this entire video, this topic has been talked about that who are the people included in the expert committee? What have the people involved done so far? Will the truth of all the allegations in the Adani case be known through sealed envelopes and SEBI.
अडानी मामले की सुनवाई करते हुए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने सेबी को पूरे मामले की छानबीन करने का आदेश दिया है। एक एक्सपर्ट कमेटी गठित की है। जो इस बात का पता लगाएगी कि क्या भारत का नियामिकीय ढांचा ठीक-ठाक है या नहीं? अगर ठीक-ठाक नहीं है तो किस तरह की सुधार की जरूरत है? सेबी और एक्सपर्ट कमिटी दोनों को अपनी रिपोर्ट 2 महीने के भीतर सौंपनी होगी। एक्सपर्ट कमिटी अपनी रिपोर्ट सुप्रीम कोर्ट को सीलबंद लिफाफे में सौंपेगी। इस पूरे वीडियो में इसी विषय पर बात की गई है की एक्सपर्ट कमेटी में कौन-कौन लोग शामिल है? जो लोग शामिल हैं, उन्होंने अब तक क्या कुछ किया है? क्या सीलबंद लिफाफे और सेबी के जरिए अडानी मामले के सभी आरोपों की सच्चाई का पता चल पाएगा। https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I5Kd2f3Pnc

Anon in What's app : I don't trust the 6 member committee set up by CJ Chandrachud to look into the Adani Scam. All it will end up in, is a cover-up.
** Especially the 2 Bankers, OP Bhat, fmr SBI, was on the same flight to Australia (Coal Mines) withbModi and Adani, and under CBI lens for loans to Vijay Mallya.
** KV Kamath, fmr ICICI, now board of Reliance, was also under investigation for loans given under Chandra Kochar, of which Kamath too was a part. These loans then turned into NPAs.
** Nandan Nilekani, Infosys, is a corporate Honcho and is not going to go against the Modi-Adani combine, no Corporate house can, without fear of ED/IT raids, fear of retribution.
** The other 3 on the panel, namely, former Supreme Court judge AM Sapre, Justice retd. JP Devinder and Somshekar Sundaresan a lawyer with expertise in security laws.
** About Sunderasan, from what I've heard from an important source, is not good either. AM Sapre does not know much about financial security matters, is another input received.
** The only person truly welcoming the committee is Adani himself.

SB In WA: Justice AM Sapre is a right wing judge.

GS: Oh lord nobody is saying anything about the committee members unless I have missed something
As someone said in one of the YouTube discussions
The terms of reference of the committee do not include the issue of money laundering
The thrust seems to be on whether any security laws have been violated

SS in WA: Apart from scanning the trackrecords of individual members -- important as it is -- more fundamental is the fact that in today's ambience of intimidation and terror, no "decent" one would be ready to be a part of any such committee and thereby risk one's neck.
Only those who would like to ingratiate with the regime and look upon this as a useful opportunity will come forward.

That's precisely what had happened with the Pegasus. Incidentally, had anticipated in advance when the then CJI was rather desperately looking for "experts".

<<The move is, no doubt, highly welcome.
And commendable too - given that, these days, it takes some guts - even on the part of the highest court of the land, to take some plainly sensible decision.

The only apprehension is that, under the obtaining circumstances, the "expert" members, on the committee, may feel too insecure to give an opinion - howsoever justified, which may displease - let alone anger, the regime in place.
That quite a few "experts" approached by the Court have indicated disinclination - to join the contemplated committee, perhaps testifies to that perception.

This sense of panic is far from without any basis.
In fact, the most glaring and illustrative example is that of Ashok Lavasa - a former member of the Election Commission, who got, eventually, hounded out of that august body with liberal use of the proverbial "stick" and, finally, some "carrot" too. Had he been there, he'd have been the CEC today. Mr. Lavasa's crime, as it appears, was that he had been inclined to take independent stands, regardless of whether these would be liked by the regime.
At a very different end, yet another is that the mobile number of the (faceless) woman stuff attached to the then CJI, Ranjan Gogoi, who had lodged a complaint of sexual harassment by her boss, (allegedly) figures in the leaked Pegasus data bank together with those of her close relations.

Under the circumstances, unless the Court can provide some sort of legitimate protection to the prospective members from the very real threat of being harassed - to put it rather mildly, in future, it may so happen that only those who are in search of an opportunity to get into the good books of the regime may actually queue up.
That would defeat the purported purpose.>>