Experts say the judgement shows that virtual currencies are 'here to stay' in India and it is up to the country to get the regulations right
India’s Supreme Court, this past Wednesday, set aside a circular by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on virtual currencies; this could breathe new life into startups working in this field. The RBI circular, dated April 6, 2018, had directed that entities under its purview should not deal with virtual currencies.
The Supreme Court ruling was in a lawsuit between the Internet and Mobile Association of India and the RBI. Crypto currency and digital money startups and companies celebrated the ruling.
“This only reinforces the fact that crypto and blockchain are the technologies of the future,” Zac Cheah, CEO, Pundi X, a blockchain wallet provider. “It encourages us to expand our expert offerings to potential geographies such as India. We are confident that this is a positive move and will put India on the growth trajectory, as they will experience the convenience that blockchain-based digital asset transactions offer, with added security.”
India has the second-largest user base of Pundi X’s blockchain wallet, called X Wallet. In the world of digital currencies and technologies such as blockchain, users, consumers and startups offering various products and services related to virtual currencies have often taken the lead. Regulators have then moved in with their rules.
In the case of RBI, the central bank “consistently took a stand that it has not prohibited virtual currencies in India,” Sajai Singh, partner at the law firm J. Sagar Associates, points out. However, the RBI circular, while not banning cryptocurrencies, took away the lifeline of virtual currency trading and functioning of virtual currency exchanges by disconnecting them with the regular banking sector, Singh said.
An Inter-Ministerial Committee constituted on November 2, 2017, recommended a specific legal framework including the introduction of a new law, called Crypto-token and Crypto-Asset (Banning, Control and Regulation) Bill, 2018. According to Singh, the committee was initially of the opinion that a ban might be extreme, and the same objectives could be achieved through regulatory measures.