Actor Shilpa Shetty and her husband, businessman Raj Kundra, have approached the Bombay High Court to contest notices from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) demanding their eviction from their residence in Mumbai's Juhu area and a farmhouse in Pune.

These notices are linked to an ongoing money-laundering investigation connected to an alleged Bitcoin fraud case.

The couple's legal challenge was presented before a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan on Wednesday.

The court issued a notice to the ED and scheduled a follow-up hearing for Thursday.

The eviction notices, dated September 27, were only received by Shetty and Kundra on October 3. Their attorney, Prashant Patil, described the notices as arbitrary and illegal, arguing that they should be quashed. The couple contends that there is no urgent need for them to vacate their home, emphasizing that they have lived there with their family for nearly two decades. They are also seeking relief on humanitarian grounds, as their residence is the family home for six members.

The legal petitions further request the High Court to stay the effect of the eviction notices. According to court documents, the ED initiated a complaint in 2018 against an individual named Amit Bhardwaj for alleged Bitcoin fraud and related money laundering activities. Notably, neither Shetty nor Kundra has been named as accused in this case.

Throughout the investigation, Kundra has complied with multiple ED summons, appearing for questioning as required. In April 2024, the couple received a notice following an ED order that provisionally attached their assets, including their Juhu residence, which was purchased by Kundra's father in 2009. Both Shetty and Kundra responded to this notice.

However, the adjudicating authority upheld the provisional attachment order on September 18, 2024, which is said to remain in effect only until the trial's conclusion. The recent eviction notices, received just days ago, state a demand for the couple to vacate their properties, despite no prior conviction or solid evidence linking their home to the alleged offenses.

The petitions assert that their residence bears no connection to the scheduled offenses or any proceeds of crime, and Kundra has no ties to the alleged fraud.