Raj Kundra Granted Bail in ₹150 Crore Bitcoin Money Laundering Case

The Mumbai Special Court's decision to grant bail to businessman Raj Kundra marks a significant procedural development in one of India's most complex cryptocurrency-related money laundering investigations. Presided over by Special Judge R.B. Rote, the court allowed the bail plea after Kundra appeared in response to a summons issued in January. This case, spearheaded by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), centers on the fallout of the Gain Bitcoin Ponzi scheme and highlights the increasing scrutiny of digital asset flows under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The core of the ED's case rests on 285 Bitcoins that Kundra allegedly received from Amit Bhardwaj, the late mastermind behind the Gain Bitcoin scam. According to the ED, these funds were intended for the establishment of a Bitcoin mining farm in Ukraine. When the deal failed to materialize, the ED claims Kundra retained the assets, which have since appreciated to a valuation exceeding ₹150 crore. The agency's charge sheet argues that Kundra’s ability to recall the exact number of Bitcoins received in five specific tranches seven years after the transaction solidifies his status as a beneficial owner rather than a mere mediator, as he has claimed.

“

This case, spearheaded by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), centers on the fallout of the Gain Bitcoin Ponzi scheme and highlights the increasing scrutiny of digital asset flows under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Kundra's legal defense, led by lawyer Prashant Patil, successfully argued that his client has been cooperating with the investigation since 2021. Patil emphasized that all relevant documents are already in the ED's possession, making custodial interrogation unnecessary at this stage of the proceedings. The court's decision to grant bail suggests that while the prima-facie evidence shows involvement in an offense punishable under the PMLA, the judicial threshold for continued detention was not met, provided the defendant continues to cooperate with the trial.

From a regulatory perspective, this case underscores the technical challenges and evolving strategies used by Indian enforcement agencies to track proceeds of crime in the crypto space. The ED’s focus on specific wallet addresses and the historical valuation of Bitcoin demonstrates a growing sophistication in blockchain forensics. For the RegTech sector, the case serves as a critical case study in how beneficial ownership is defined in the context of decentralized assets. The ED’s rejection of Kundra’s mediator claim, based on a Term Sheet signed with Mahendra Bhardwaj, indicates that authorities are looking past verbal assertions toward documented financial agreements to establish liability.