Allahabad HC Rejects Plea to Quash FIR Against ‘Zoom Baba’ Citing Evidence of Inducing Investors in Ruby Coin Crypto Fraud [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, dismissed a writ petition filed by Mahendra Pratap Srivastava, popularly known as "Zoom Baba," seeking to quash an FIR registered against him in connection with the Ruby Coin cryptocurrency fraud citing he was actively involved in inducing investors through online meetings.

Mahendra Pratap Srivastava had filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR registered at Police Station Shushant Golf City, Lucknow. The FIR accused him of offenses under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B of the IPC, along with Section 66 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner sought not only the quashing of the FIR but also protection from arrest.

Read More: Massive Incorrect TDS Filings Crackdown: Income Tax Dept to Audit 40,000 Taxpayers

The petitioner’s counsel that he was merely a trainer engaged in educating members of the Ruby Coin Community about blockchain and cryptocurrency. They argued that the petitioner had no role in financial transactions or the development of the software associated with the alleged fraud. He also claimed to have resigned from his position on 31st October 2023, due to personal and health issues, well before any fraud allegations surfaced.

Boost Your Business with SME IPO Funding Strategies - Enroll Now

The State argued that the petitioner was an active participant in the fraudulent scheme. According to the investigation report, he was a board member of the Elite Club and played a huge role in persuading investors to buy Ruby Coin, a cryptocurrency promoted by the main accused, Samir Keshari.

Read More: Addressing Uncertainities in GST Registration: A Matter of Precedential Rule

The prosecution submitted that he conducted multiple Zoom meetings to convince investors, earning him the nickname “Zoom Baba.” The State argued that his resignation did not absolve him of liability, as the fraudulent activities took place while he was still associated with the company.

A division bench comprising Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Brij Raj Singh examined the FIR and the materials presented by the investigating officer. The court observed that the allegations against the petitioner were serious and indicated his active involvement in inducing investors to participate in the fraudulent cryptocurrency scheme.

Boost Your Business with SME IPO Funding Strategies - Enroll Now

The court held that there was no legal basis to quash the FIR, as it disclosed a cognizable offense that warranted further investigation. The High Court dismissed the writ petition.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates