After an urgent “mentioning” by Star India Limited, a Bench headed by Justice B P Singh stayed the said High Court order dated April 27.

Senior counsels Arun Jaitley and Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for Star, submitted that if the order was not stayed it would become final and trigger a probe, which was completely “unwarranted and uncalled for”.

Hearing the brief submission, the Bench also issued a notice to Anuj Kumar Bhati, on whose petition the High Court had asked MRTPC to probe the matter.

While dealing with Bhati’s petition, the High Court Division Bench had referred the matter to MRTPC for investigation into “the finances, chances of winning, element of allurement, misrepresentation, fraud and other related allegations” in the larger interest of the general public.

Bhati had raised doubts about the way celebrities, who participated on behalf of some charities, appeared on the popular show and always won hefty prize money unlike ordinary contestants. The High Court had also noted that it raised suspicions about whether questions on the show were being manipulated to help these people.

While Bhati had alleged that Star India violated its own rules and repeatedly allowed its employees to take part in the show, Star India on its part today submitted that the programme was an independent show based on general knowledge and skill and did not promote products of any specific company. So, it failed to satisfy the ingredients of “unfair trade practice”.

Denying that any false impressions were created in the show, the company said, “The High Court wholly misdirected itself in assuming that the provisions of the MRTP Act would be applicable to the general knowledge quiz game without prima facie satisfying as to whether the ingredients for such investigation are fulfilled.”

The questions of allurement, misrepresentation or fraud did not arise as the public voluntarily participated in the game show without any inducement, it said.

Denying any such falsity was being done, the appellant finally added that the issues with regard to finance were confidential and proprietary matters and it was not under any obligation to divulge such details.