Byju Raveendran breaks silence after Singapore jail order
What's the story
Byju Raveendran, the founder of Indian edtech company BYJU'S, has been sentenced to six months in jail by a Singapore court. The sentence is for contempt of court due to his failure to comply with multiple asset-related orders since April 2024. Along with the prison term, Raveendran has also been fined $70,500.
Compliance requirements
Raveendran ordered to surrender himself
The Singapore court has ordered Raveendran to surrender himself and provide documents proving his legal ownership of Beeaar Investco Pte. The corporate entity held shares in a related company. This ruling comes as part of the broader contempt proceedings against him, highlighting the seriousness with which the court is treating his non-compliance with asset-related orders. In the US, lenders are trying to recover losses from a failed $1.2 billion loan.
Response
Raveendran says parties were close to a settlement
In light of the court's decision, Raveendran has clarified that key parties were close to a settlement. He said lenders such as GLAS Trust and QIA had agreed "in principle" to a settlement with only minor issues left for certain parties. He expressed disappointment over how the Singapore court matter was reported and pursued, creating a "misleading impression" about him at a sensitive stage of negotiations.
Clarification
Singapore proceedings 'not a finding of fraud'
Raveendran clarified that the Singapore proceedings were a "procedural contempt of court order" related to document disclosure disputes in ongoing proceedings. He stressed it was "not a finding of fraud, dishonesty, or any wrongdoing on the merits." He also said he had been directed to appear on June 15 and that appeal options remained available.
Assurance
'Acted in best interests of BYJU'S'
Raveendran has maintained that he acted in good faith and in the best interests of BYJU'S, its employees, students, and stakeholders. He also clarified that neither he nor the founders personally received any portion of the disputed funds. The money was used for legitimate business purposes. This statement is aimed at clearing any misconceptions about their financial conduct amid ongoing legal proceedings.