The SMC is a forward-looking move in the modernisation of the capital market regulation India. It goes beyond codifying the various disparate statutes in one instrument and instead attempts to effect a structural redefined securities laws.

SEBI’s re-ordering in 2026, caused by up-streaming and the altered locus of risk of settlement, was, in institutional terms, the only possible course.

If compliance can be achieved with reasonable confidentiality, side letters can change from being the source of hidden privileges to the instruments of orderly governance.

The SEBI's NISM mandate reflects an attitude which holds that the maturation of Indian private capital markets cannot be built on informal standards and, similarly, on the appointment being regarded as a mere business function.

Section 166(2) emerges not merely as a statutory directive but as a potential transformative mandate, compelling directors to transcend shareholder primacy and embed climate imperatives within the corporate conscience.

SEBI’s shift toward liquid net-worth requirements prioritizes immediate solvency over dynamic, risk-weighted metrics used in the US and EU. While this deleveraging enhances market stability, it risks institutional consolidation and reduced SME flexibility.

The Amendment functions as a structural foreclosure, rendering the bank-affiliated NBFC model economically obsolete. The regulatory signal is clear: diversification is viewed as arbitrage, and the era of the homogenized universal bank has returned.

This article examines the SAT order’s interpretation of the RPT framework with respect to materiality assessment, and delineates regulatory implications for industry stakeholders.

The current framework has critical shortcomings that demand targeted reforms to instill genuine accountability.

The Linde Judgement is a major step towards a more substance oriented and shareholder centric RPTs regime in India.

The recent amendments by SEBI in the LODR aligns with the effort to maintain the governance standards in response to changing realities of the market.

The 2025 amendments position Section 233 at the core of India’s intra-group restructuring landscape. However, the unchanged 90 % threshold which is anchored in a bygone ownership model, hinders the workability of the fast-track mergers.

Ultimately, India's dual standards for “control” stem from two distinct policy objectives: minority protection and market dominance.

SEBI's August 2025 consultation paper proposes key reforms to MPO and MPS norms for large-cap IPOs, aiming to enhance market capitalization and public shareholding. This article examines how these regulatory changes balance dilution concerns, boost investor protection, and address legal challenges to ensure market integrity and robust participation in India's equity markets.

It is necessary to have a robust system in place for complicated algos like that of black box algos.

Taking inspiration from the S-REIT market, SEBI needs to focus on strengthening REIT’s regulatory framework and work on investing in the vast domestic market available through REITs.

SEBI’s ban resolves the illiquidity issue; nevertheless, it also produces new market deformity which includes regulatory arbitrage towards AIFs, uneven playing field, and scarcity of domestic capital India’s startup ecosystem.

Until refinements are made, mutual funds will remain on the sidelines of the pre-IPO market, limited to anchor allocations and public issues as India’s IPO boom continues unabated—while the question of whether protection has inadvertently become exclusion remains unresolved.

The Jindal Polyfilms case marks a turning point. For years, Section 245 sat dormant, an ambitious provision without infrastructure. Now, India has a live opportunity to reimagine it.

A double-derivative remedy would further these goals. By embracing double‐derivative actions, India would reduce opportunities for regulatory partitioning of wrongs and bring its shareholder remedy framework into harmony with 21st‐century global corporate governance standards.

SEBI’s accessibility mandate is both progressive and disruptive. It extends the idea of investor protection beyond disclosure and governance to the very ability of investors to participate.

This blog aims to take a look at the strategic shift in how India is trying to positions itself in the global market and facing competition head on vis-a-vis markets like Singapore. 

With the development of Digital Ledger Technology, real estate tokenization has gained much traction.

The judgment of the Delhi High Court marks an important order in India’s audit regulatory landscape as it cements the validity of the NFRA under Section 132 of the Act and its powers to hold audit firms and auditors accountable.