WinZO co-founder Saumya Rathore moves Karnataka HC against ED case

The co-founder and director of WinZo Games Pvt Ltd, Saumya Rathore, has approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) decision to conduct a money laundering investigation against the online gaming platform and its representatives from Bengaluru, arguing that the probe lacks territorial jurisdiction.

The matter was urgently taken up on Thursday by Justice M Nagaprasanna, who directed the ED not to take any coercive action against Rathore until the next date of hearing. The court has posted the case for final hearing on January 14, 2026, and made it clear that no adjournments would be granted.

Rathore has sought the quashing of an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) registered by the ED’s Bengaluru zonal office on November 6, 2025, along with its addendum, and all consequential investigation and proceedings initiated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. She has also challenged the proceedings and remand orders passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court in Bengaluru, contending that they are without jurisdiction.

Appearing for Rathore, senior advocate Sajan Poovayya submitted that the ED’s decision to investigate the matter from Bengaluru is legally unsustainable, as all material aspects of the alleged offence are located in Delhi. He told the court that WinZO’s registered office, business operations, bank accounts, employees, and financial transactions are all based in Delhi, and that there is no substantive link to Karnataka.

“Fourteen bank accounts have been frozen, all in Delhi. All the alleged transactions have taken place there. Jurisdiction cannot be determined by the convenience of the investigating agency,” Poovayya argued, questioning why the ED chose to proceed from Bengaluru when it has a fully functional office in Delhi.

He further submitted that even if the ED were to carry out the investigation through its Bengaluru zonal office for administrative reasons, the judicial proceedings arising out of such an investigation must lie before courts in Delhi, which alone have territorial jurisdiction. According to him, the remand of WinZO co-founder Paavan Nanda by a Bengaluru court is itself without authority of law.

Justice Nagaprasanna observed that any determination on the issue of jurisdiction would have implications for other accused persons as well, including Nanda, who continues to remain in judicial custody. When Poovayya clarified that he was not seeking bail in the present proceedings, the court noted that a finding on jurisdiction could nevertheless have a consequential effect.

Opposing the plea, counsel appearing for the ED submitted that the petition was not maintainable and urged the court not to interfere at what he described as a crucial stage of investigation. The ED argued that it is a pan-India investigative agency empowered to investigate offences under the PMLA across the country, irrespective of state boundaries.

The agency also informed the court that assets worth nearly ₹800 crore have been attached or frozen in connection with the case, and that multiple complaints have been received from users of the WinZO platform alleging unfair gaming practices, including the use of bots.

Responding to the ED’s submissions, Rathore’s counsel clarified that the petition does not challenge the agency’s authority to investigate, but only the forum from which the investigation and court proceedings are being pursued. Even if the allegations are assumed to be correct, he argued, no part of the alleged offence occurred in Bengaluru, except for the issuance of summons and the subsequent arrests.

After hearing both sides, Justice Nagaprasanna directed the ED not to precipitate the matter until the next hearing. “We will take it up on January 14 and decide. There will be no adjournment. The matter will be concluded,” the court said.

The ED’s probe arises out of multiple FIRs registered against WinZO Games Pvt Ltd and others, alleging cheating, impersonation, blocking of customer accounts, and misuse of identity documents. Based on these FIRs, the agency registered an ECIR and arrested Rathore and co-founder Paavan Nanda on November 26, 2025, under the PMLA.

The ED has alleged that the company engaged in unfair practices in real money games by deploying algorithms and software without adequately disclosing to users that they were not competing against human players. It has also alleged that customer withdrawals were restricted and that proceeds of crime were generated from bets placed and lost by users on the platform.

According to the agency, proceeds of crime amounting to ₹505 crore have been frozen in the form of bank balances, fixed deposits, bonds, and mutual fund investments. The ED has further alleged that the company operated real money gaming services in overseas markets such as the US, Brazil, and Germany from India, and diverted funds abroad under the guise of overseas investments.

WinZO has denied any wrongdoing and has contested both the allegations and the jurisdiction of the ED’s Bengaluru-based proceedings.

The High Court’s ruling on January 14 is expected to be closely watched, as it could set an important precedent on territorial jurisdiction in investigations involving digital businesses and online gaming platforms operating across states.