Police Raid Shilpa Shetty & Raj Kundra House in P*orngr@phy and Money Laundering Case

.

.

.

In a shocking turn of events, police have raided the residence of Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty and her husband, businessman Raj Kundra, in connection with an ongoing investigation into pornography and money laundering activities. The raid has sent shockwaves across the media and Bollywood industry, with authorities claiming that the couple is allegedly involved in a case related to the production and distribution of adult content.

Raj Kundra, who has faced similar accusations in the past, is reportedly at the center of the investigation, with authorities looking into possible financial irregularities linked to the illegal activities. Police have seized various electronic devices and documents from the couple’s residence as part of their probe.

Shilpa Shetty, who has maintained a relatively low profile during the legal proceedings, is reportedly cooperating with the authorities, although her connection to the case remains unclear. This unexpected development has raised many questions about the couple’s involvement and the extent of their alleged activities.

The police investigation is still ongoing, and more details are expected to emerge in the coming days. Fans and the public are closely following the case, with many expressing shock and disbelief over the involvement of high-profile figures like Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra in such a scandal.

Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty were reportedly raided by ED on Friday in connection with a pornography case.Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty were reportedly raided by ED on Friday in connection with a pornography case.

Shilpa Shetty’s lawyer’s statement

In a statement, advocate Prashant Patil said, “There have been reports in the media saying that my client Mrs Shilpa Shetty Kundra has been raided by the Enforcement Directorate. These reports are not true and are misleading. There is no Enforcement Directorate raid on Mrs Shilpa Shetty Kundra as she has nothing to do with any offence of whatsoever nature.”

The statement added that there is an ongoing investigation into her husband, Raj Kundra. “However , the case in question is an ongoing investigation regarding Mr Raj Kundra and he is cooperating with the investigation for truth to come out.”

The lawyer requested the media to refrain from using Shilpa’s images while talking about the investigation. “Would request the electronic and print media to refrain from using the videos, pictures and name of Mrs Shilpa Shetty Kundra as she has nothing to do with the case. Strict cognisance shall be taken against irresponsible journalism wherein the pictures or videos of Mrs Shilpa Shetty Kundra are shared on this matter.”

What is the case about

Earlier in the day, news agency PTI reported that the Enforcement Directorate on Friday raided the premises of businessman Raj Kundra, the husband of actor Shilpa Shetty, and some others as part of a money laundering case linked to the alleged distribution of pornographic and adult movies, official sources said.

The sources said around 15 locations in Mumbai and some cities in Uttar Pradesh are being searched, including the home and office of 49-year-old Kundra and some others. The agency is understood to be questioning Kundra at one of these premises.

This money laundering case of May 2022 stems from at least two Mumbai police FIRs and chargesheets filed against Kundra and others. The businessman and some others were arrested in the case by the police and later granted bail.

This is the second money laundering case against Kundra. Early this year, the ED had attached assets worth 98 crore of Kundra and Shetty in a cryptocurrency case. The couple, however, obtained relief from the Bombay High Court against this ED attachment order.

According to the probe agency, the ‘Hotshots’ app was being used by accused persons for uploading and streaming obscene content. Kundra had claimed there was no evidence of him being “actively” involved in the creation of alleged questionable porn content. He had said he was falsely implicated and was not even named in the FIR and was dragged by the respondent (police) in the case.