The Supreme Court of India has declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking guidelines for cryptocurrency trade and mining. The plea was heard by a bench that included Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra.&nbsp;
<a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/supreme-court-refuses-to-entertain-plea-to-frame-guidelines-for-regulation-of-trading-of-cryptocurrencies/articleshow/105140472.cms?from=mdr" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">The court</a> remarked that while the petitioner filed the plea under Article 32 of the Constitution in the form of a PIL, the primary goal appeared to be to gain bail for the petitioner in a connected case.
<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="india-s-supreme-court-will-not-hear-anything-about-crypto-regulation">India’s Supreme Court will not hear anything about crypto regulation</h2>
The Chief Justice of India (CJI)-led Supreme Court bench, in response to the petition, stated that the petitioner’s requested reliefs are primarily legislative in nature. In light of the petition’s characteristics, the bench consisting of Justices Manoj Misra and JD Pardiwala dismissed the appeal.
The petitioner, Manu Prashant Wig, is notably embroiled in a crypto case that has been filed with the Delhi Police.&nbsp; In a case lodged in 2020 by the Economic Offence Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police, Wig is accused of luring and convincing individuals to invest in cryptocurrencies under the guise of higher returns.
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote">
 We are unable to subscribe to this course of action. The petitioner would be at liberty to move the appropriate court for the grant of regular bail. Insofar as the main reliefs are concerned, they are more in a nature of a legislative direction which the court cannot issue under Article 32 of the Constitution. <cite>Supreme Court Bench</cite>
</blockquote>
In the interim, Wig was a director at Blue Fox Motion Picture Limited, where he solicited investments from individuals; the victims subsequently informed the EOW in Delhi of this. The 133 investors or victims who placed their money in Wig reported being defrauded and filed a lawsuit against the company.
Petitioner Manu Prashant is requesting release from judicial custody in response to the PIL demand for crypto trading regulations and a framework in India.
Article 32 addresses the right to constitutional remedies, and 32 (1) allows citizens the right to petition the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their rights. The bench noted that among the reliefs sought in the plea filed by the individual from Uttar Pradesh was a direction to prosecute offenses involving digital assets/cryptocurrencies.
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote">
 We accordingly dispose of the petition granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedies in accordance with the law. <cite>Supreme Court Bench</cite>
</blockquote>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="the-supreme-court-grants-the-defendant-liberty-to-find-other-legal-remedies">The Supreme Court grants the defendant liberty to find other legal remedies</h2>
Although the Supreme Court dismissed the PIL, the bench allowed petitioner Manu, who is currently imprisoned, to pursue legal remedies and consult other relevant authorities.
During the court session, the CJI Chandrachud-led bench advised the petitioner to seek bail in a different court.&nbsp; Concerned about the desire for crypto trading laws, the court stated that the crypto framework guidelines demands are geared towards the <a href="https://www.cryptopolitan.com/ripple-and-sec-updates-leave-xrp-in-the-red/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">direction </a>of legislative works, and they cannot issue any directions under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote">
 You want bail from our court, you pursue your remedies before the appropriate court for the grant of bail. Why should we entertain? These are basically bail applications styled under the garb of Article 32 petitions. [..] Parliament will do it, we will not issue any directions. <cite>CJI DY Chandrachud</cite>
</blockquote>
Meanwhile, the status of crypto trading in India remains a contentious issue because there are no conventional norms, standards, or particular structures in place to deal with cryptocurrencies.&nbsp;&nbsp;
Although cryptocurrency trading is allowed in India, there are no additional procedures in place to resolve any disagreements or concerns among traders. Because of this insecurity in the system, <a href="https://www.cryptopolitan.com/india-to-train-police-to-tackle-crypto-crime/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">crypto trading</a> is a danger in the country.

India’s Supreme Court dismisses PIL plea for crypto regulations

Table of Contents

Cryptopolitan_News

Other articles published on Nov 11, 2023

Nigeria and Raspberry Pi Foundation Collaborate to Launch Code Clubs

BlackRock Challenges SEC’s Treatment of Spot-Crypto and Crypto-Futures ETFs

John Deaton’s Advice on Handling SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s Actions

The Comprehensive Guide To Investments in Web 3.0 Technology

XRPL Welcomes Next Major Upgrade: Details

CME Surpasses Binance to Claim Dominance in Bitcoin Futures Trading

Join our free newsletter for daily crypto updates!