https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277527 Under the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992, insider status extended to connected or deemed connected persons reasonably expected to access unpublished price sensitive information, and pledging of shares was treated as dealing in securities. The post-2002 standard covered trading while in possession of UPSI, and the six-month limit for former connected persons was relevant to the scope of liability. On the facts, the majority treated SRSR Holdings, the Chintalapati group entities, and most family members as insiders who dealt in Satyam shares while in possession of UPSI, but B. Jhansi Rani was distinguished because her sale pre-dated the amendment and lacked a finding of trading on the basis of UPSI. The order also stressed that market restraint and disgorgement had to reflect individual roles and consistent findings. en-us Fri, 11 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Dec 2018 06:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277527 Under the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992, insider status extended to connected or deemed connected persons reasonably expected to access unpublished price sensitive information, and pledging of shares was treated as dealing in securities. The post-2002 standard covered trading while in possession of UPSI, and the six-month limit for former connected persons was relevant to the scope of liability. On the facts, the majority treated SRSR Holdings, the Chintalapati group entities, and most family members as insiders who dealt in Satyam shares while in possession of UPSI, but B. Jhansi Rani was distinguished because her sale pre-dated the amendment and lacked a finding of trading on the basis of UPSI. The order also stressed that market restraint and disgorgement had to reflect individual roles and consistent findings. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 11 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277527