Raj Kundra challenges PMLA court cognizance in ₹185-crore bitcoin case at Bombay HC
Synopsis
Raj Kundra has taken his ₹185-crore bitcoin case to the Bombay High Court, challenging the PMLA court's January 2026 cognizance order on procedural grounds. The High Court has admitted the petition and issued notice to the ED — a move that could stall money laundering proceedings if a stay follows on 6 August 2026.
Key Takeaways
Raj Kundra filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court on 28 July 2026 challenging the Special PMLA Court's cognizance order of 5 January 2026 .
The ED alleges Kundra received 285 Bitcoins — worth an alleged ₹185 crore — linked to proceeds of crime, for a failed Bitcoin mining project in Ukraine .
Kundra argues the PMLA court failed to comply with Section 223(1) of the BNSS , making the cognizance order liable to be quashed.
The petition was heard by Justice Ashwin Bhobe ; the High Court admitted it and issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate .
The next hearing is scheduled for 6 August 2026 .
Actor and businessman Raj Kundra has moved the Bombay High Court challenging the cognizance order passed by the Special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in an alleged ₹185-crore bitcoin case. Kundra filed a writ petition targeting the Special PMLA Court's order dated 5 January 2026, in a case where the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged he received 285 Bitcoins linked to proceeds of crime.
Background of the Case
The ED filed a supplementary prosecution complaint against Kundra in September 2025, alleging that he accepted 285 Bitcoins — purportedly connected to criminal proceeds — for setting up a Bitcoin mining project in Ukraine that ultimately failed. The agency further alleged that Kundra was unable to account for the cryptocurrency or disclose the relevant wallet details.
The Special PMLA Court subsequently took cognizance of this supplementary complaint, issuing the order of 5 January 2026 that Kundra now seeks to quash.
Kundra's Legal Challenge
Through his writ petition, Kundra has contended that the Special PMLA Court failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). His legal team argues this non-compliance renders the cognizance order legally unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
The petition was argued before Justice Ashwin Bhobe by advocate Prashant Patil. The High Court admitted the writ petition and issued notice to the ED, directing it to file a reply.
High Court Admits Petition, Next Hearing Set
The Bombay High Court has admitted the writ petition and issued a formal notice to the Enforcement Directorate to respond. The matter has been posted for the next hearing on 6 August 2026.
Notably, this is not Kundra's first brush with legal proceedings — he was previously arrested in 2021 in a separate case related to alleged pornographic content. The current bitcoin case marks a distinct and separate legal front for the businessman, who is also the husband of actress Shilpa Shetty.
What Happens Next
The ED is expected to file its reply before the next hearing date. The High Court's decision on whether to stay or quash the PMLA court's cognizance order could have significant implications for the pace of the money laundering proceedings against Kundra. A stay, if granted, would effectively pause the Special Court's jurisdiction over the matter until the High Court rules on the merits of the petition.
Point of View
Not substance — a classic legal tactic to stall cognizance before the merits of the money laundering allegation are even tested. The invocation of Section 223(1) of the BNSS signals his legal team is betting on a technical gap in how the PMLA court processed the supplementary complaint. If the High Court grants a stay on 6 August, it would effectively freeze ED proceedings — and that delay, in money laundering cases, often works in the accused's favour. The broader question this case raises is whether India's PMLA courts are applying the new BNSS procedural framework rigorously enough to withstand High Court scrutiny.
NationPress
28 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ₹185-crore bitcoin case against Raj Kundra?
The Enforcement Directorate has alleged that Raj Kundra received 285 Bitcoins — purportedly worth ₹185 crore and linked to proceeds of crime — for setting up a Bitcoin mining project in Ukraine that failed. The agency claims he could not account for the cryptocurrency or disclose the relevant wallet details.
Why is Raj Kundra challenging the PMLA court's cognizance order?
Kundra contends that the Special PMLA Court did not comply with mandatory procedural requirements under Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) when taking cognizance of the ED's supplementary complaint. He argues this non-compliance makes the 5 January 2026 order legally invalid and liable to be quashed.
What did the Bombay High Court do with Kundra's petition?
The Bombay High Court, before Justice Ashwin Bhobe, admitted the writ petition and issued a formal notice to the Enforcement Directorate to file its reply. The next hearing is scheduled for 6 August 2026.
When was the ED's supplementary complaint filed against Kundra?
The ED filed its supplementary prosecution complaint against Raj Kundra in September 2025, after which the Special PMLA Court took cognizance and issued the order of 5 January 2026 that is now being challenged.
What could happen if the High Court stays the PMLA court's order?
If the Bombay High Court grants a stay on the cognizance order, it would effectively pause the Special PMLA Court's jurisdiction over the case until the High Court rules on the merits of the writ petition, potentially delaying the money laundering proceedings against Kundra.
