Crypto Chaos: Courts Say "Not Our Job" in Epic Case Dismissal 🪙💸

Crypto Chaos: Courts Say “Not Our Job” in Epic Case Dismissal 🪙💸

Ah, what a diabolical waltz of bureaucracy and semantics! Five months ago, in the glamorously crumbling maze of the Delhi High Court, WazirX users were nudged politely—as one might prod a stubborn cat off the couch—to seek solace in the arms of what now seems to be an equally indifferent suitor: the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). Their query? A simple cry for justice after their funds were spirited away faster than a magician’s rabbit. And the verdict? Cryptocurrencies, it seems, are neither fish nor fowl—neither goods nor services, said the forum, dusting its robes of any obligation like a meticulous housekeeper.

With judgment delivered on March 13 and promptly shelved online, one almost imagines the gavel falling in poetic slow motion. Justice AP Sahi and the ineffably wise Bharatkumar Pandya dismissed the earnest complaint of a Mr. Gurmeet Singh et al. against the mysterious Zanmai Labs. Their solemn proclamation? “Patience, dear petitioners,” though perhaps not in so many words. Parliament hasn’t even bothered to pen laws yet, and until it does, the financial watchdogs—FIU and the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre—might also want to join the orchestra. Alas, the tune remains discordant.

“The parliament is yet to enact laws that may ultimately regulate or even provide legal measures for tackling such claims through the appropriate forum. The involvement of the Financial Intelligence Unit of India (FIU) and the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre is also required,” droned the verbose judgment, leaving us none the wiser but undoubtedly more tired.

But, let us rewind a little for the uninitiated. The WazirX exchange, that buoyant beacon of virtual digital assets, was hacked to the sweet tune of Rs 2000 crore in July 2024. Aggrieved users, clutching at straws like characters in a Greek tragedy, took their laments to the Delhi High Court. Notices were sent, eyebrows were raised, and even the Delhi Police had a speaking role. Yet the court suggested consumer courts might be a warmer hearth for their woes. Oh, the irony!

One might assume that when the consumer court finally stepped up to bat, the matter would gain clarity. But lo! Justice A.P. Sahi and his partner-in-judgment Mr. Pandya elegantly passed the cryptographic buck yet again. Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs), they admitted, could be taxable under GST and the Income Tax Act. But are they money? No. Securities? Heavens, no. So, what are they? Digital Schrödinger’s cats, occupying a nebulous space free of any legislative cage.

To be fair, Sahi and Pandya did toss a thoughtful suggestion into the void: that regulatory agencies like the FIU and India’s Cyber Crime watchdogs should poke their noses into this cryptic mess. However, without legislative backing, these suggestions float like helium balloons with holes: lovely at the start, doomed to deflate.

Ultimately, one must stand back and marvel at the deft choreography of avoidance performed by the Indian legal system. Delhi High Court passes the ball to consumer courts. Consumer courts punt it up to Parliament. Parliament, in its ineffable wisdom, does the legal version of whistling nonchalantly while looking the other way. Meanwhile, crypto users, no doubt teetering on the edge of sanity, remain as forsaken as a forgotten sock behind the dryer.

What’s the moral of the story? Well, dear reader, should you lose your hard-earned cash to the shadowy realms of cryptocurrency exchanges, don’t bother calling for justice. The courts couldn’t care less. Flip a coin, take a vacation, or perhaps start writing a novel about the elusive entity called “Indian Crypto Law.” It’s bound to sell better than digital tokens.

2025-03-27 16:22

Read More