After a series of postponements, the Indian Crypto vs. Reserve Bank Of India (RBI) case is being overheard by a new 3-judge bench. The discussion started on 14th January as the Supreme Court of India reopened the session post the winter break. Unlike the last few hearings, judges want to take their time.

Today appears to be the third day of the cryptocurrency trial, the start of which was somewhat disappointing — the Crypto Vs. RBI Case was deemed to be the first matter to be presented on 14th January. But it was forced down the line.

The dismayed crypto fans thought about a new hearing date. To everyone’s astonishment, the Crypto Vs. RBI case hearing started in the other half of the day. The judges denoted that this is because the case is a lengthy one. Thus, it could have hindered other essential concerns. The case was pushed to the afternoon session to avoid such situations.

IAMAI counsel Ashim Sood started the case by designating the shortcomings of the draft bill introduced to the Government of India. He described the idea of blockchain to the panel. Additionally, he demonstrated how new technology is converting common in the banking sector.

He also highlighted that the usage of the name currency with virtual currencies is being misinterpreted as a menace to the Indian monetary system.

Counsel Sood sharply challenged the RBI’s power to outlaw crypto.

To note, the RBI has been showing pointers at the price buoyancy of the cryptocurrency and demands that customer rights are at danger. To combat this, Mr. Sood bought the panel’s attention to the study of the stock market, which shows similar volatility.

According to Sood, crypto price volatility should be the SEBI’s interest, not the RBI’s. Furthermore, the tax intrusion issues need to be drawn up by the CBDT.

Moreover, he said that crypto is a stock, and the RBI has no power in this area. Thus the RBI does not have sufficient power to administer a crypto ban.

The RBI’s appeal to ban crypto appears to be turning baseless. As per the counsel, it has no matter at hand to create such a substantial judgment against crypto.

Besides, the counsel sharply challenged the basis which the RBI relied on when implementing the Banking Regulation Act. To mention, the act restricted Indian Banks from rolling deposit/withdrawal accounts for crypto exchanges.

Counsel Sood debated the RBI should have endeavored to control crypto rather than placing a ban. Besides, he opposes the RBI’s statement that it’s challenging to do it. He defends his point of view by quoting examples of countries like Japan, Germany, Australia, and Italy that have been flourishing in regulating crypto.

The panel asked counsel whether crypto endangers the monetary system that the RBI defends. It appears he was set to face the problem. Subsequently, he forcefully denied the risks of crypto tormenting the Indian Monetary system soon.

He continued that IAMAI is supporting the case of de-anonymous crypto, which continually needs KYC. Therefore the chances of funding terrorism and money laundering are isolated.

The council was caught by some questions posed by the panel of experts. According to the judges, cryptocurrency is both a stock and a medium of exchange, as per its description. If that’s so, then how does it not intervene with the monetary system?

The panel also challenged the use of cryptocurrencies like BTC as a commodity. Counsel Sood is yet to explain these questions in particular.

Estimating by the running of the trial, it appears IAMAI has a compelling case, and we might soon hear some great news.