<h1>Petition seeking mandatory public disclosure of ultimate beneficial owners and AIF/FPI portfolio holdings limited by Article 32 overreach concerns</h1> The Supreme Court questioned a public-interest petition seeking mandatory public disclosure of ultimate beneficial owners and portfolio holdings of alternative investment funds, foreign portfolio investors and their intermediaries, observing that Article 32 cannot be used for a 'roving and fishing' inquiry. The bench asked the petitioner to amend the plea and directly challenge the securities regulator's response, noting the petitioner had been directed earlier to make a detailed representation to the regulator for consideration in accordance with law and that statutory remedies remain if the representation is not decided within a reasonable time.