ED vs WinZO: Bail for Saumya Rathore on gender grounds; Paavan Nanda’s plea rejected

A Bengaluru sessions court has granted bail to Saumya Singh Rathore, co-founder of WinZO Games Pvt Ltd, in a money-laundering case registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). However, the court rejected the bail plea of co-founder Paavan Nanda, allowing the agency to take him into custody for further interrogation.

The common order was passed by Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge M Chandrashekar Reddy in a complaint arising out of alleged offences under the PMLA. While Rathore secured bail on the statutory ground available to women under the law, the court held that the stringent conditions governing bail in money-laundering cases continued to apply to Nanda.

The ED had registered the case on November 6 on the basis of predicate offences reflected in three FIRs filed in Bengaluru, Rajasthan and Delhi. As part of the probe, the agency conducted search and seizure operations at Rathore’s residence and at WinZO’s premises between November 18 and 22, following which both Rathore and Nanda were arrested on November 26.

According to the ED, WinZO’s gaming operations involved alleged manipulation through algorithms and bots, leading to wrongful gains of about ₹177 crore. The agency has further alleged diversion of funds to overseas subsidiaries, laundering of proceeds of crime through cloud-based infrastructure hosted on Amazon Web Services (AWS), identity misuse of a large number of users, and transnational fund flows of nearly $55 million.

Both accused have denied the allegations, asserting that they fully cooperated during the searches and questioning, and have challenged the legality of the ED’s search and seizure operations.

Allowing Rathore’s bail plea, the sessions court held that she was entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA, which exempts women from the law’s otherwise stringent “twin conditions” for bail.

“Accused No.1 being a ‘woman’, her case falls under the proviso to Section 45(1)(ii) of the PML Act and the twin conditions are not applicable in her case,” the court observed. The judge also noted that Rathore had already undergone substantial custodial interrogation and that her continued detention was not warranted.

“Merely because she has to be confronted with statements of her employees or that some more evidence is to be collected, that will be no ground for seeking Accused No.1 for further custody by ED,” the order said, adding that apprehensions of evidence tampering could be addressed through stringent bail conditions.

Rathore was directed to be released on a personal bond of ₹5 lakh with two sureties, surrender her passport, not leave the country without prior permission of the court, and cooperate with the investigation.

In contrast, the court denied bail to Nanda, holding that the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA continued to apply and that he had failed to make out a case for relief at this stage.

“I am unable to subscribe to his view that he has reasonably made out a case that he is not guilty of the alleged offences and that he is unlikely to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses,” the judge said. Accepting the ED’s submission, the court noted that the investigation had expanded in scope and scale and had acquired a transnational character.

“The materials on record would show that the investigation is becoming more transnational and that huge amount of data is collected to prima facie show the complicity of Accused No.2,” the order noted, granting the ED custody of Nanda from December 27 to December 30. The court directed that Nanda should not be subjected to any ill-treatment and should be given daily access to his counsel.

The ED was represented by advocate Madhu N Rao, while Rathore was represented by senior advocate Sajan Poovayya and Nanda by senior advocate M S Shyam Sundar.

Separately, Delhi-based gaming firm WinZO has moved the Karnataka High Court challenging the ED’s multi-day search and seizure operations at its Malviya Nagar office. In its writ petition, the company has termed the agency’s actions “illegal, void, and without proper justification,” seeking to quash the search conducted between November 18 and 22, 2025, and the panchanama prepared thereafter.

WinZO has also sought a stay on the ED’s freezing orders dated November 21, which blocked its bank and escrow accounts, production of seized electronic devices for forensic examination, disclosure of the ED’s recorded “reasons to believe,” and a stay on the use of the panchanama in ongoing proceedings.

The legal battle comes amid a severe operational disruption for the real-money gaming platform. Since December 2, WinZO’s app and website have been largely inaccessible, with users complaining on social media about their inability to access deposited funds, raising concerns over the company’s financial and operational stability.