A few thoughts

Caveated with the disclaimer that Ive only appeared in a bankruptcy court once, and usually rely entirely on our bankruptcy lawyers when issues arise in my matters, so this is all speculation:

1) Im not sure — based only on the statute — that the exception applies here. The debt itself was a penalty for fraud but the debt procured through fraud would have been the underlying loans.

2) I think there is a difference between dischargeability and the stay. And the stay (and the Code) really protects the other creditors as much as a debtor. If he did file (and met other requirements) I imagine all other creditors would object to a lifting of the stay as it would essentially turn an unsecured (and nonfinal) claim into a highest priority claim over secured creditors. Again this is speculation, but it would surprise me if that were how it worked.. Rather I think non-dischargability (if it applies) means that once he emerges from bankruptcy, hed still be liable (assuming its not overturned). But that doesnt mean the claim would jump the creditor line in collecting from the estate during the pendency of proceedings.