Actor Shilpa Shetty’s husband and businessman Raj Kundra was granted bail by a special court on Friday in connection with the alleged Rs 150 crore Bitcoin ‘Ponzi’ scheme case.
Kundra, one of 18 accused in the Enforcement Directorate (ED) probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), appeared before the court after it took cognisance of the chargesheet filed last month. The court granted him bail on furnishing a surety of Rs 1 lakh and directed that he must seek prior permission before travelling abroad.
Speaking briefly outside the courtroom, Kundra said he had faith in the judiciary but declined further comment. “My wife does not let me speak at home and my lawyer does not allow me to speak in court,” he said.
The special court had earlier issued summons to Kundra and Dubai-based businessman Rajesh Satija after taking cognisance of the ED’s chargesheet. Both were directed to appear before the court on January 19. Kundra and Satija were added as accused in a supplementary chargesheet filed in September last year.
Kundra was never arrested during the investigation and was required to formally seek bail following the court’s cognisance.
According to the ED, Kundra allegedly received Rs 6.5 crore from alleged Gain Bitcoin scam ‘mastermind’ Amit Bhardwaj, which was converted into 285 Bitcoins for setting up a Bitcoin mining farm in Ukraine, purportedly to be received by an Israeli citizen.
The central probe agency has claimed that despite several opportunities since 2018, Kundra has failed to provide the wallet addresses where the Bitcoins were transferred.
Kundra’s counsel, Prashant Patil, argued that the ED’s valuation was legally untenable. He told the court that the agency pegged the value of 285 Bitcoins in July 2017 at roughly USD 1 million (about Rs 6.6 crore), but later adopted the April 16, 2024 valuation of around Rs 52 lakh per Bitcoin to arrive at a figure close to Rs 150 crore.
Patil contended that such a “pick-and-choose valuation” without statutory backing was impermissible and said the relevant valuation date could only be July 2017, when the alleged proceeds were generated.
“Such an approach of ED is wholly untenable and legally impermissible, as it amounts to pick-and-choose valuation without any statutory backing. The ED cannot be permitted to capitalise on market fluctuations selectively to inflate the alleged proceeds of crime. The relevant date for valuation can only be the date on which the alleged proceeds were generated, i.e. July 2017, and not an arbitrary future date chosen to suit the prosecution,” Patil said.
Furthermore, he argued that even if the ED’s case were accepted at face value, the maximum attachable amount would be Rs 6.6 crore and that the attachment of properties worth Rs 150 crore was grossly disproportionate and liable to be set aside.
“At the highest, even assuming the ED’s case at face value, the maximum attachable value could only be Rs 6.6 crores, being the value of 285 bitcoins in July 2017. The attachment of properties worth Rs 150 crores is therefore grossly disproportionate, ex facie arbitrary, and liable to be set aside,” Patil argued.
The ED opposed the bail plea, but the court ultimately granted relief to Kundra, who is now considering moving the High Court to challenge the summons issued in the case.
