MUMBAI: A special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on Friday granted bail to businessman Raj Kundra in a Bitcoin-linked money laundering case, after he appeared before it in pursuance with a summons issued in January.
Special judge RB Rote had issued the summons after taking cognisance of a supplementary charge-sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in September 2025, wherein Kundra was arrayed as one of the 18 accused.
Though Kundra was not arrested during the course of the investigation, he was required to formally apply for bail after the court took cognisance of the supplementary charge-sheet.
On Friday, he presented himself before the court and moved a bail application, which was allowed. The court granted him bail on furnishing a surety of ₹1 lakh and directed him to seek prior permission before travelling abroad.
According to the ED’s charge-sheet, Kundra received 285 Bitcoins in 2017 from Amit Bhardwaj, the mastermind behind the Gain Bitcoin Ponzi scheme, for setting up a Bitcoin mining operation in Ukraine which was to be handed over to an Israeli national. Though the mining project never materialised, Kundra continued to retain the 285 Bitcoins – presently valued at more than ₹150 crore – and did not disclose the digital wallet to which the cryptocurrency was transferred despite multiple opportunities since 2018, the charge-sheet said.
While taking cognisance of the charge-sheet in January, the special court recorded that statements of witnesses and material collected during investigation prima facie showed that Kundra was involved in an offence punishable under the PMLA.
The court also took note of the agency’s claim that although Kundra claimed he acted merely as a mediator, he failed to produce documentary material to substantiate the same. The charge-sheet referred to a “term sheet” agreement signed between Kundra and Mahendra Bhardwaj, father of Amit Bhardwaj, and asserted that its existence undermined Kundra’s claim of being only an intermediary.
The charge-sheet also cited Kundra’s recollection of the exact number of Bitcoins he received in five tranches years after the transaction, saying it “solidifies the fact that he was indeed the recipient of Bitcoins as a beneficial owner and not acted merely as a mediator”.
Appearing for Kundra, advocate Prashant Patil argued that his client had cooperated with the ED since 2018 and that custodial interrogation was unwarranted as all relevant documents were already in the agency’s possession.