Mumbai:

Entrepreneur Raj Kundra, who is also the husband of Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty Kundra, has initiated legal action against those who made defamatory claims about him in a news article and a YouTube channel, which linked him to an illegal immigration case involving Riya Barade.

A case has been registered by Raj at the Juhu Police Station in Mumbai against the authors of these reports under Section 356(3) of the Bharruya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The complaint, filed based on court orders, aims to address what Kundra describes as deliberate attempts to tarnish his reputation.

Talking about the same, Raj Kundra said, “I have been compelled by the media to take this step. On multiple occasions, they have tarnished my image by publishing false and defamatory statements. Despite sending takedown notices and giving them the opportunity to retract, no action was taken. My matter is subjudice, I have been fighting in court for my discharge”.

He further mentioned, “It’s been three years in which three judges have changed. Whilst it’s frustrating I have full faith in the law. I don’t deserve to be pronounced guilty in a trial by the media”.

The court has granted permission to the Juhu Police to investigate the case and file an FIR against those responsible. This signals the start of a thorough investigation into the matter, which Kundra hopes will restore his reputation and hold the responsible parties accountable.

Earlier, Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra got relief from the Bombay High Court after their eviction notice from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was put on hold. The couple had earlier contested their eviction notice in court concerning a money laundering case.

Prashant Patil, Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra’s lawyer, had denied any involvement in the Ponzi scheme in a statement calling out the false media reports in the case.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Mumbai:

Actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband Raj Kundra have moved the Bombay High Court challenging ED’s notice directing them to vacate their house in Mumbai’s Juhu area and a farmhouse in Pune in connection with a money-laundering case.

The pleas came up for hearing on Wednesday before a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan.

The court issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and posted the matter for hearing on Thursday.

Their petitions challenge ED notices dated September 27 issued to Ms Shetty and Mr Kundra directing them to evict their residence in Mumbai and a farmhouse in Pune within ten days in connection with a money-laundering case linked to an alleged Bitcoin fraud.

The couple’s advocate Prashant Patil said that Ms Shetty and Mr Kundra received the eviction notices only on October 3. He termed the notices arbitrary and illegal and sought them to be quashed.

According to the pleas, there is no grave urgency for the petitioners to vacate their premises and that the issuance of such eviction notices was uncalled for.

“The petitioners are also seeking relief on humanitarian grounds as the premise in question is their residential premise in which they have been staying with their family of six members for almost two decades,” the petitions said.

The pleas also sought HC to stay the effect of the eviction notices.

As per the pleas, the ED had in 2018 lodged a complaint against one Amit Bhardwaj and others for an alleged Bitcoin fraud and on charges of money laundering. Both Shetty and her husband have not been named as accused in the case.

The ED, during its probe, had summoned Mr Kundra for questioning on several occasions. Kundra had appeared before the agency after each summons, the pleas said.

In April 2024, Ms Shetty and Mr Kundra received a notice based on an order passed by the ED provisionally attaching their assets including their residential premise in Juhu that had been purchased by Kundra’s father in 2009.

Both Ms Shetty and Mr Kundra submitted their response to the notice.

“However, in contravention to the provisions of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the provisional attachment order on September 18, 2024. This order clearly states that the attachment is confirmed only till the conclusion of trial and is subject to its outcome,” the pleas said.

“The petitioners (Shetty and Kundra) on October 3 received two notices dated September 27, 2024, directing them to vacate their residential premises and the farmhouse,” the petitions said.

The petitions said no eviction order/notice can be issued prior to conviction.

The pleas added that their residential premise has no connection with the scheduled offence or any proceeds of crime.

The petitions further claimed that Kundra had absolutely no connection with the alleged fraud.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)