February 25 News: The Delhi High Court recently dismissed a lawsuit filed by a group of cryptocurrency investors against a certain crypto platform. Judge Prushaindra Kumar Kaurav stated that the platform is a private company and does not meet the definition of a “state” entity under Article 12 of the Constitution. Therefore, it cannot be subject to judicial intervention under Article 226, and the petition lacks a legal basis for acceptance.
The lawsuit was initiated by investors including Rana Handa and Aditya Malhotra, requesting the court to strengthen regulation of the crypto platform, and to direct the CBI or a special investigation team to investigate. They also asked for the freezing of user funds that were reportedly restricted. However, the court clearly indicated that ordering a criminal investigation is an extremely special circumstance, and some complaints have not even completed the FIR process, which is insufficient to trigger a mandatory investigation.
The core dispute in the case concerns withdrawal restrictions. Several users reported difficulty in withdrawing funds from the platform since 2025, with issues such as account valuation discrepancies and limit adjustments. Rana Handa told the court that he invested approximately 1.422 million rupees in 2021, but subsequent withdrawal obstacles led to widespread doubts about the platform’s liquidity and compliance. Affected investors had previously filed complaints through the National Cyber Crime Portal and eventually turned to legal channels to seek justice.
The court also emphasized that the regulation of cryptocurrencies falls under legislative and policy matters, which should be formulated by Parliament and regulatory agencies such as RBI and SEBI, rather than by the judiciary proactively creating rules. In the absence of clear regulations, the court prefers to guide parties to resolve disputes through traditional legal pathways such as civil lawsuits, consumer complaints, or police reports.
From an industry perspective, this ruling highlights the legal gray area caused by the still-developing crypto regulatory framework in India. For investors facing frozen funds, withdrawal difficulties, or platform disputes, obtaining quick relief through constitutional litigation becomes significantly more challenging. Legal experts generally agree that this decision follows existing constitutional principles but also amplifies concerns about the lack of crypto asset regulation, investor fund safety risks, and platform compliance reviews. It is expected that legislative discussions and regulatory policy battles will continue to intensify into 2026.
Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to
Disclaimer.
Related Articles
How OTC merchants step by step into the trap of "illegal business operation"
Author: Lawyer Shao Shiwei
Profiting from buying and selling virtual currencies through price differences, but being prosecuted for receiving foreign exchange transfer funds—this article is based on a real case handled by Lawyer Shao, involving an OTC merchant accused of illegal business operations and concealing criminal proceeds through off-market USDT transactions.
In this case, the involved party has long been engaged in buying and selling USDT to earn price differences. During a normal transaction, he unfortunately received RMB funds transferred by an underground bank upstream, illegally exchanging currency for others. Big data analysis confirmed that this fund was identified as foreign exchange transfer funds.
The question then arises: Is simply earning from virtual currency price differences enough to be criminally liable for receiving foreign exchange transfer funds from illegal foreign exchange transactions upstream?
More notably, there are differing opinions within the case-handling agency regarding whether to apply the crime of illegal business operations or the crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds.
Lawyer Shao’s view is that such cases cannot be simply classified; the behavior must be assessed based on the individual's role in a layered manner.
PANews6m ago
XRP Could Face Securities Classification Under New U.S. Crypto Framework, Says Cardano’s Hoskinson
Charles Hoskinson argues that under the revised CLARITY Act, tokens like XRP would qualify as securities, igniting his feud with the XRP community.
He called Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse out again, cautioning that having no laws is better than having a bad law.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskin
CryptoNewsFlash20m ago
Bank failures, war conflicts: Iran's $7.8 billion cryptocurrency "shadow economy" becomes the focus again
As the US-Israel coalition escalates actions against Iran, the country's "shadow economy" has once again come into focus. Iran is using cheap electricity to mine Bitcoin, stabilizing its currency and bypassing sanctions. Mining hash rate accounts for 2%-5% of the global total and is expected to create a $7.8 billion ecosystem by 2025. The stablecoin USDT is also used to stabilize the rial exchange rate, which has depreciated by over 96%. Additionally, during protests, the public has accelerated their shift to Bitcoin to protect assets.
区块客41m ago
TRM Labs Reports $35B Lost to Crypto Scams Worldwide in 2025
TRM Labs reports a rise in global crypto fraud, reaching $35 billion in 2025, likely underestimating actual losses. Enhanced training and blockchain tools are essential for law enforcement to combat sophisticated fraud schemes effectively.
TheNewsCrypto42m ago
Iran and North Korea are both using it! Stablecoins have become the preferred virtual asset for illegal transactions, with involved fraud totaling $51 billion.
According to the FATF report, stablecoins have become the preferred asset for illegal transactions, especially in countries like Iran and North Korea. The organization calls for increased regulation of stablecoin issuers and states that by 2025, stablecoins will account for the majority of illegal virtual asset transactions. To address these challenges, the FATF recommends that issuers strengthen their technical capabilities to improve regulatory efficiency.
区块客45m ago
FATF: Peer-to-peer transfers of stablecoins pose a major money laundering risk; it is recommended that issuers introduce freezing and blacklisting mechanisms.
The latest FATF report indicates that P2P transfers of stablecoins have become a major source of money laundering risk in the crypto space, especially in unhosted wallet transactions where regulation is difficult. Approximately 84% of illegal crypto transactions involve stablecoins. FATF recommends strengthening regulation of stablecoin issuers and promoting anti-money laundering measures.
GateNews2h ago
