In a recent development, the Indian Supreme Court has rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking regulations and guidelines for cryptocurrency trading in the country. The decision, led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), emphasizes the legislative nature of the petitioner’s demands.
Why Was the Petition Rejected?
The bench, consisting of CJI Chandrachud, Justice JD Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, dismissed the plea, stating that the petitioner’s requests are more legislative than legal. The petitioner, Manu Prashant Wig, is currently in custody in connection with a cryptocurrency case filed by the Economic Offence Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police in 2020. The case accuses Wig of deceiving investors by promising high returns through cryptocurrency investments.
The Legal Background
Despite the rejection of the PIL, the Supreme Court acknowledged the petitioner’s right to pursue legal remedies. The court advised Wig to approach a different court for bail, emphasizing that the demands for cryptocurrency trading regulations fall within the legislative domain. The court also highlighted its inability to issue directives under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
Conclusion
The Indian Supreme Court’s rejection of the crypto petition underscores the need for a legislative approach to cryptocurrency regulations. As the legal landscape evolves, it is crucial to monitor developments in India’s efforts to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for cryptocurrency trading. The rejection does not halt the petitioner’s pursuit of legal remedies, highlighting the intricate balance between legal and legislative avenues in addressing the challenges posed by cryptocurrencies in the country.
FAQs
Why did the Supreme Court reject the PIL?
The Supreme Court rejected the PIL as it deemed the petitioner’s demands for cryptocurrency regulations to be more legislative in nature. The court emphasized that such matters should be addressed through the legislative process rather than through judicial directives.
What led to the filing of the PIL?
Manu Prashant Wig, the petitioner, is currently facing charges related to a cryptocurrency fraud case. As one of the directors at Blue Fox Motion Picture Limited, Wig allegedly deceived investors by enticing them to invest in crypto with promises of higher returns. Seeking relief from judicial custody, Wig filed the PIL to establish regulations and guidelines for cryptocurrency trading in India.
What is the current status of crypto trading in India?
The absence of standardized rules and guidelines has left the status of crypto trading in India uncertain. However, there are indications that the country is working on a regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies, drawing from recommendations by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB). This framework is expected to materialize as legal legislation within the next five to six months, providing clarity to the crypto landscape in India.
