HC grants bail to Simpy Bharadwaj in Bitcoin-based Ponzi scam case

The Bombay High Court granted bail to Simpy Bharadwaj, arrested in a bitcoin ponzi scam, citing procedural irregularities and lack of evidence.

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court (HC) granted bail to Simpy Bharadwaj on Friday, who was arrested in a bitcoin-based investment ponzi scam case in December 2023. Simpy is Amit Bharadwaj’s sister-in-law, the deceased main accused and director of Variabletech Private Limited.

HC grants bail to Simpy Bharadwaj in Bitcoin-based Ponzi scam case

Justice Manish Pitale, presiding over the court, granted her bail after observing the procedural irregularities and insufficient grounds for her arrest, ruling that her continued detention was unjustified. Simpy was arrested on December 17, 2023, which occurred amidst allegations that she had obstructed an ED search operation. She was not named in the original FIRs that established groundwork for the ED’s case registered against Variabletech in 2018, which implicated Amit Bharadwaj and others who were directly involved in a fraudulent Bitcoin investment scheme, where investors were promised high returns but ultimately defrauded. Her name started appearing only in subsequent FIRs filed in December 2019 and February 2022, pointing out that ED’s decision to arrest her based on her actions during the search is not justified. The grounds for her arrest were described as hastily constructed, lacking credible evidence to prove she was directly involved in any money laundering activities.

The court also considered Simpy’s status as a woman, drawing attention to the ruling in Kalvakuntla Kavitha Vs. Directorate of Enforcement where the court reiterated the importance of granting special treatment to women as specified in Section 45(1) (strict bail conditions for money laundering) of the PMLA. Given her role as a mother, the court found her familial responsibilities to be of importance and because of the hardships imposed by her arrest, the court concluded that she deserved the bail.

The court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application, and it should not influence the future proceedings of the trial court.