Question
Under the SEBI Act, 1992, read with the SEBI (Procedure
for Board Meetings) Regulations , if a member of the Board is a Director of a company whose "Draft Red Herring Prospectus" (DRHP) is being considered for an investigation order during a Board meeting, which of the following is the correct legal procedure?Solution
Explanation: This scenario is governed by Section 7A of the SEBI Act (inserted via the 2002 Amendment). It codifies the principle of Nemo judex in causa sua (no one should be a judge in their own cause). The law is absolute: once a "pecuniary interest" (direct or indirect) is identified, the member is legally barred from both deliberation and the decision-making process. Unlike some corporate board rules where "disclosure and participation" might be permitted, SEBI’s statutory mandate requires total recusal for that specific agenda item to preserve regulatory integrity.
What is the appointed day under Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act 1973?
Which section stipulates the lawful questions that can be asked in cross examinations?Â
In the case of Harvey v. Facey it was held that_______________
Which section empowers the court to condone delay in applying for the extension of limitation period?Â
Which section of the Indian Evidence Act is related to the doctrine of ‘res ipsa loquitor’?
Appeal shall lie only if case involves a substantial question of law in case of :
Under Section 316(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, what offense is committed by a person who, being entrusted with property or having domi...
A Magistrate receives a bail application from an accused arrested for a non-bailable offence. Under which section of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh...
Who may give evidence of a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document?
Which of the following is true relating to Red- herring Prospectus?