MEMO SUBMITTED: Demand for a Judicial Truth Commission on the DHFL Verdict

Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

Baranagar, WB, India

Jul 8, 2025

Abstract
This article announces the submission of a people’s memorandum to India’s highest constitutional and judicial offices, demanding a Judicial Truth and Accountability Commission to probe the DHFL Supreme Court verdict—a decision that legitimized the corporate expropriation of thousands of depositors’ life savings. The memo exposes judicial silence, regulatory complicity, and the erasure of dissent. Backed by a rapidly growing online mass petition, this is a collective cry for justice, transparency, and the restoration of democratic integrity in the face of systemic betrayal.

In a determined move toward transparency, justice, and institutional accountability, a comprehensive memorandum has been formally submitted via email to the highest constitutional and judicial authorities of the Republic of India. The memo calls for the immediate constitution of a Judicial Truth and Accountability Commission to investigate the controversial Supreme Court verdict in the DHFL insolvency case—a ruling that, in effect, sanctioned the expropriation of depositors’ savings and erased any semblance of dissent in judicial deliberation.

This memorandum has been addressed to the following authorities:

The Hon’ble President of India
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India
The Hon’ble Chairperson, Law Commission of India
The Hon’ble Chairperson, Standing Committee on Law and Justice
The Secretary-General, Supreme Court of India

At the heart of this appeal is a demand to uphold the sanctity of justice in a democracy that claims to be governed by the rule of law. The DHFL resolution, upheld by the apex court, has left thousands of depositors—many of them senior citizens—economically devastated, and morally betrayed.

We are not alone. An online mass petition, linked below, has been launched to gather public support and keep the momentum alive. The petition has been gaining signatories every hour, reflecting the simmering public discontent and the shared demand for accountability from all pillars of state.

Why This Memo Matters
This is not just a legal issue—it is a democratic reckoning. When judicial pronouncements appear to legitimize corporate profiteering at the cost of citizen savings, the moral compass of the judiciary must be examined.

The memo does more than question the verdict—it challenges the ethical foundations of the judicial process itself. It calls for:

1. A public inquiry into the judicial reasoning and ethical conduct behind the verdict.
2. Scrutiny of the Solicitor General’s role in the proceedings.
3. An investigation into the regulatory silence of institutions meant to safeguard public interest.
4. Formal inclusion of depositor voices and civil society in any retrospective or remedial process.

A public inquiry into the judicial reasoning and ethical conduct behind the verdict. The Supreme Court, in its April 1, 2025 ruling, upheld the Piramal Resolution Plan, effectively legitimising a 100% haircut for fixed deposit holders. In doing so, it departed sharply from the NCLT’s observation (May 19, 2021):

“The resolution plan does not adequately address the claims of small depositors who are neither shareholders nor secured creditors, yet are the worst hit.”

Scrutiny of the Solicitor General’s role, especially given how his submissions overlooked the constitutional duty to protect senior citizens and small savers—many of whom had invested their life savings in good faith. The NCLAT, in its January 27, 2022 order, had flagged this lacuna, stating:

“The absence of any provision for retail fixed deposit holders in the resolution plan makes the plan appear tilted in favour of corporate interests and raises serious questions about equity.”

An investigation into the regulatory silence of institutions like the RBI, SEBI, and credit rating agencies that remained passive while the resolution process unfolded in a manner that “stripped thousands of citizens of their rights under a cloak of legal finality.”

Formal inclusion of depositor voices and civil society representatives in any retrospective or remedial process. As the NCLT had warned,

“Democracy demands that justice be participatory and inclusive—especially in cases where the impact of insolvency proceedings extends far beyond the boardroom.”

From Silence to Solidarity
The memo is not just a letter—it is a people’s document of dissent. It challenges silence, demands explanation, and insists on justice. Depositors are no longer isolated complainants; they are claimants of constitutional rights.

We urge concerned citizens, legal professionals, activists, and journalists to endorse this call and amplify the petition. Justice must not only be done—it must be seen to be done, transparently, and in public view.