Supreme Court Rejects CA's Plea Against Mutual Funds 'Sahi Hai' Ads

The Supreme Court today dismissed a challenge to Bombay High Court's dismissal of a PIL against endorsement of mutual funds through advertisements like 'Mutual Funds Sahi Hai' and 'Mutual Funds mein SIP sahi hai'.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order, after hearing petitioner-Chandrakant C Shah in-person.

The petitioner argued that the High Court found an element of public interest at first and issued notice in the matter, but subsequently, it "hastily" dismissed the case. The bench however noted that the petitioner had filed another PIL before the High Court, which was dismissed, and a special leave petition against the dismissal order, which was also dismissed.

In this regard, the petitioner clarified that the other PIL was on a slightly different issue and got dismissed on maintainability. However, the bench was not inclined to entertain his plea.

"Let the others bother for themselves", remarked Justice Mehta.

Petitioner-Shah, a chartered accountant, had filed the underlying public interest litigation before the High Court seeking directions to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to withdraw the permission granted to the Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI) in relation to advertisements of mutual funds.

He alleged that AMFI misused the permission/liberty granted by SEBI for the commercial benefit of its members. It was claimed that AMFI's Mutual Funds advertisements were entirely commercial in nature and are misleading investors.

Shah further argued that AMFI's endorsements through advertisements like 'Mutual Funds Sahi Hai' were reckless and unfounded. It was claimed that the AMFI had a vested interest and that the ads not backed by research, were meant solely for the benefit of the organisation.

Additionally, Shah asserted that the SEBI had a responsibility to secure the interests of investors and regulate the securities market. He further contended that the function of investor education and awareness could not be delegated to a private or commercial body.

On 17.09.2025, the High Court dismissed Shah's PIL. Aggrieved, he approached the Supreme Court.

In the present petition, he disclosed that he filed a second PIL before the High Court seeking restraint on sale and marketing of mutual fund scheme/product "Systematic Investment Plan", but the same was dismissed in limine in April on the ground that he had not suffered any legal injury. Subsequently, he filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court, but that was also dismissed in limine in July.

Case Title: CHANDRAKANT C. SHAH Versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ANR., SLP(C) No. 31275/2025