Businessman Raj Kundra arrives at the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) Court, in connection with the GainBitcoin scam, in Mumbai on February 20, 2026.
| Photo Credit: ANI
A special court in Mumbai on Friday (February 20, 2026) granted bail to businessman Raj Kundra after he appeared before it in a money laundering case linked to an alleged Bitcoin scam.
Special Judge for cases under Prevention of Money Laundering Act R.B. Rote had in January issued a summons to Mr. Kundra after taking cognisance of a charge sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the case.
Mr. Kundra appeared before the court and filed a bail plea, which the court allowed.
His lawyer, Prashant Patil, submitted that Mr. Kundra had cooperated with the ED’s investigation since 2021. All the documents related to the case were already in the possession of the probe agency, therefore his custody was not needed, said the lawyer.
The court, while taking cognisance of the charge sheet, had said that the statements of witnesses and other evidence “prima-facie shows” that Mr. Kundra and Dubai-based businessman Rajesh Satija were involved in an offence punishable under the PMLA.
Mr. Kundra, the central probe agency has alleged, received 285 Bitcoins from the alleged mastermind of Gain Bitcoin Ponzi scam Amit Bhardwaj for setting up a Bitcoin mining farm in Ukraine.
As the deal did not materialise, Mr. Kundra was still in possession of 285 Bitcoins presently valued at more than ₹150 crore, the ED claimed.
As per the charge sheet, Mr. Kundra claimed to have acted only as a mediator, but did not provide “any underlying documentary evidence to prove the same”.
An agreement titled “Term Sheet” was signed between him and Amit’s father Mahendra Bhardwaj, and hence, Mr. Kundra’s claim of being only a mediator was not tenable, the charge sheet said.
The fact that Mr. Kundra remembers the exact number of Bitcoins received in five specific tranches seven years after the transaction “solidifies the fact that he was indeed the recipient of Bitcoins as a beneficial owner and not acted merely as a mediator”, the ED said.
Despite having multiple opportunities since 2018, Mr. Kundra failed to provide the wallet addresses where the 285 Bitcoins were transferred. He cited damage to his iPhone X as the reason for the missing information, which was an attempt to destroy evidence, the charge sheet said.
Published – February 20, 2026 05:03 pm IST
