India’s Supreme Court: Crypto Ban? More Like Crypto Chaos! 🤷‍♂️💰

by

On a Monday that could have been any other, the Supreme Court of India found itself entangled in the web of cryptocurrencies, a topic as mysterious as a midnight séance. The absence of rules to govern these digital phantoms was the main course of the day, and the bench, composed of the illustrious Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh, concluded that a ban would be as sensible as trying to ban the wind. Instead, they decreed that a well-crafted regulatory framework was the way forward, a decision that could either save the economy or plunge it into a new kind of chaos, depending on your perspective.

The Court had hinted at the need for crypto regulations before, much like a parent repeatedly reminding a child to clean their room. Addressing Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, the bench expressed frustration with the government’s delay in creating a regulatory mechanism. “Why are we still waiting?” Justice Kant seemed to ask, as if the answer were as obvious as the nose on one’s face.

Justice Kant recalled a prior instance where the Attorney General had cited the global nature of crypto markets as a challenge to regulation. “Two years ago, I asked the Attorney General if any steps were being taken. He responded with concerns about the international market. But times are changing, and new frameworks are emerging globally. Banning it would be like shutting your eyes to reality,” he stated, as if scolding a child for not seeing the obvious.

The bench noted that the lack of clear legislation surrounding cryptocurrencies was causing headaches for courts handling related litigation. “Tomorrow, someone might ask the Court what this asset is. How are they supposed to make rulings in the context of the law?” Justice Kant pondered, as if the answer were as elusive as a unicorn.

ASG Bhati assured the court that she would obtain further directions from the central government regarding the formulation of a regulatory policy and would submit a progress report by July. “We’ll get it done, Your Honor,” she promised, as if making a vow to the gods.

While noting that broader policy decisions could be taken up later, the Court stressed that immediate attention must be paid to the individual case at hand. With conflicting narratives around whether the petitioner was a victim or a perpetrator, the bench directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to expedite its investigation. “This policy debate can be addressed separately. Right now, we need clarity on this individual’s role — whether he’s been wronged or is the one committing wrongdoing,” the bench remarked, as if setting the stage for a dramatic courtroom showdown.

The matter is scheduled for further hearing on May 30, with the CBI tasked with making significant progress in the investigation by then. Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave and advocates Mohit D. Ram, Rajul Shrivastav, and Kishan Dhaiya represented the petitioner in court, each hoping to bring a bit of clarity to the murky waters of crypto law.

Read More

2025-05-20 14:34