Money-laundering case: Shilpa Shetty, husband challenge ED eviction notices in HC

Actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband, Raj Kundra, have moved the Bombay High Court, challenging the notices issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) 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 ED and posted the matter for hearing on Thursday.

The petitions challenge the ED notices dated September 27 that were issued to Shetty and Kundra, directing them to evict their residential premises here and a farmhouse in Pune within 10 days in connection with a money-laundering case linked to an alleged Bitcoin fraud.

The couple’s advocate, Prashant Patil, said Shetty and 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 say.

The pleas also sought the HC to stay the effect of the eviction notices. As per the pleas, the ED had in 2018 lodged a complaint against 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 Kundra for questioning on several occasions. Kundra had appeared before the agency after each summons, the pleas said.

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

Both Shetty and 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 could be issued prior to conviction. The pleas added that their residential premise had 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.