We demand the formation of a Judicial Truth and Accountability Commission to investigate the Supreme Court’s DHFL verdict (April 1, 2025) given by the judicial bench headed by Justice Bela M. Trivedi⤡ and Justice S. C. Sharma⤡. The judgment upheld a corporate resolution plan that allegedly expropriated the hard-earned savingssands of depositors—an injustice laid bare by the NCLT’s verdict on 19th May 2021 and the NCLAT’s ruling on 27th January 2022, both of which hinted at the irregularities of the DHFL resolution process and plans. In a post-truth democracy, justice must answer to the people—not merely to power.

To:

The Hon’ble President of India,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India,

The Hon’ble Chairperson, 22nd Law Commission of India,

The Hon’ble Chairperson, Standing Committee on Law and Justice,

The Hon'ble Secretary-General, Supreme Court of India

Subject: Demand for a Judicial Truth and Accountability Commission to Examine the DHFL Verdict and Restore Public Confidence in the Judiciary in a Post-Truth Era

“Justice must not only be done—it must be seen to be done.”

On 1st April, 2025, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India delivered a seemingly controversial verdict in the Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) insolvency case, upholding a corporate resolution plan that resulted in the mass wipeout of thousands of depositors’ life savings—many of them senior citizens, physically challenged persons, widows or families of retired Indian army personnel and a number of charitable institutions.

For more details on the given Supreme Court Verdict, view the following:

This verdict, given by Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice S. C. Sharma's Bench, allegedly refused to scrutinize the RBI-appointed Committee of Creditors (CoC) for DHFL or demand transparency from public institutions. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta⤡, representing the Government of India, supported the plan—despite unresolved concerns of presumed cronyism, gross undervaluation of assets, exclusion of retail depositors and opaque decision-making. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court apparently/reportedly failed to consider the disproportionate harm inflicted on small depositors, thereby setting a precedent of indifference toward vulnerable financial citizens, while showing remarkable deference to corporate conglomerates and state authorities.

Post-verdict public and legal reactions have raised red flags: • Widespread media skepticism⤡ about the judgment’s implications; • RTI responses from RBI, CAG, and IBBI confirming lack of documentation on the CoC; • Boycott of Justice Trivedi’s farewell by leading bar associations (SCBA, SCAORA)—an extraordinary event suggesting institutional disquiet: Thanking SCBA and SCAORA for Skipping Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s Farewell: A Stand for Judicial Integrity VIEW HERE ⤡

These events cannot be viewed in isolation. They reflect a larger jurisprudential drift in the post-2016 Indian judiciary: toward financial authoritarianism, corporate deference, and the erasure of public accountability in critical economic adjudications.

It is no wonder that the Parliamentary Standing Committee questioned such instances of financial abuse:

Standing Committee on Finance raps IBC over unsustainable haircuts, says 13,000 cases worth Rs 9 lakh crore pending VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on August 03 2021, ©Moneycontrol)

Hence, the DHFL scam "resolution" does not simply appear to be a financial injustice, or financial abuse. It was a betrayal of public trust.

Despite RTI evidence showing that the RBI, CAG, and IBBI hold no records of the expenditures the CoC incurred during DHFL’s resolution, the Court made no inquiry into this supposed vacuum.

Even worse, when victims and civil society raised concerns, they were met with SLAPP-style defamation lawsuits aimed at silencing dissent and exhausting those seeking answers.

Justice via Intimidation? A Financially Abused Citizen vs. the Corporate-State Nexus VIEW HERE ⤡

In a post-truth society, truth commissions are not optional—they are essential.

Judicial immunity must not become judicial impunity. Judges are not above public accountability, especially when their decisions affect lakhs of lives. There is no mechanism in India to ethically audit final judicial reasoning. We must establish one. Legalized financial violence creates collective trauma. The DHFL verdict cannot be buried in silence—it must be publicly remembered and scrutinized. This campaign is not about personal blame. It is about institutional repair, public memory, and ensuring that the judiciary does not drift away from its constitutional duty.

We sincerely call upon the Hon’ble President of India, Chief Justice of India, and Law Commission to:

Constitute a Judicial Truth and Accountability Commission to:

a) Investigate the DHFL verdict, including judicial reasoning and ethical conduct.

b) Examine the role of SGI Tushar Mehta and regulatory silence.

c) Assess the systemic exclusion of depositors and absence of dissent.

d) Investigate the broader question of judicial-corporate proximity and how it subverts public confidence.

The Commission should be composed of:

Retired judges of unimpeachable integrity Eminent legal scholars and constitutional jurists Former public auditors (e.g., ex-CAGs) Representatives of civil society, affected depositor groups, and public interest organizations 2. Audit the DHFL resolution under the IBC for:

a) Constitutional violations of depositors’ rights. b) Regulatory breaches by RBI, CAG, IBBI, and SEBI. c) Conflicts of interest potentially involving Piramal Group and committee members.

Propose Legal and Institutional Reforms via a White Paper and Parliamentary Legislation:

a) Enable limited public review of judicial verdicts causing large-scale harm b) Address judicial impunity in high-impact financial cases c) Prevent SLAPP suits that target public interest litigants, researchers, and whistleblowers d) Establish institutional checks against conflicts of interest between former and sitting judges and corporate litigants e) Create a National Judicial Memory Archive to record contested decisions, along with dissenting legal opinions from civil society and academia

Judges may retire, but their judgments endure.

Let this petition serve as a people’s plea—not for revenge, but for reconciliation through truth.

We do not want scapegoats. We want systems to change.

Sign this petition if you believe:

✅ The judiciary must be accountable to the Constitution, not corporations. ✅ India needs institutional memory and truth commissions in the face of judicial overreach. ✅ SLAPP lawsuits must be outlawed to protect democratic discourse. ✅ Financial justice must prioritize people—not crony corporate tycoons.

It’s time to defend truth, justice, and victims of legalized injustice. Sign now. Share widely. Demand truth. Defend justice. Reclaim democracy.

On Behalf of the Distressed DHFL Victims,

Once in a Blue Moon Academia (OBMA) VIEW HERE ⤡