In a significant legal milestone, the Madras High Court has recognised cryptocurrency as a form of property under Indian law. The ruling, delivered on October 25, 2025, by Justice N. Anand Venkatesh in the Rhutikumari vs Zanmai Labs Pvt. Ltd., marks the first time an Indian court has explicitly classified Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs) as property capable of ownership and trust.
The case originated when the petitioner, Rhutikumari, sought an injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to prevent Zanmai Labs, the operator of the WazirX exchange, from interfering with her 3,532 XRP tokens. Her holdings had been frozen after a large-scale cyberattack on one of WazirX’s wallets and a subsequent restructuring process initiated in Singapore by its parent company, Zettai.
During the proceedings, Justice Venkatesh examined global jurisprudence, referring to cases from the UK, New Zealand, and Singapore to illustrate how courts worldwide are treating digital assets. Furthermore, he relied on Indian Supreme Court precedents to reason that cryptocurrencies, though intangible, clearly possess attributes of property such as the capability of “being enjoyed and possessed (in a beneficial form)” and “being held in trust”.
Ultimately, the court ruled in the petitioner’s favour and granted interim protection. It directed Zanmai Labs to either furnish a bank guarantee of Rs 9.56 lakh or deposit the same amount in escrow until arbitration concludes. Moreover, the judgement emphasised that exchanges hold cryptocurrency assets in fiduciary trust for users, strengthening investor rights and clarifying their legal standing in India’s evolving digital asset landscape.
The Court On Defining Cryptocurrency
The Madras High Court held that cryptocurrency qualifies as property under Indian law, explaining that it possesses characteristics of ownership, control, and enjoyment despite being intangible. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh stated that although cryptocurrency “is not a tangible property nor is it a currency”, it is “a property, which is capable of being enjoyed and possessed (in a beneficial form)” and “capable of being held in trust”.
Moreover, the court reasoned that digital assets such as cryptocurrencies exist as entries on a blockchain ledger, identifiable and transferable like other forms of property. The judge noted that holders own each unit through private and public keys stored in digital wallets, enabling them to control, trade, or transfer it securely. Therefore, the court concluded that cryptocurrency qualifies as property because owners can exclusively possess, use, and transfer it.
Additionally, the court emphasised that Indian law treats crypto assets as “virtual digital assets” rather than speculative instruments. It further cited Section 2(47A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which recognises such assets as a distinct class that people can store, trade, and sell….
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
