Singapore’s High Court has rejected a plea by Byju Raveendran, the founder of the failed Indian edtech firm, to halt a six-month jail sentence.
“On 9 July, the Singapore High Court declined an application to stay the civil contempt order of 25 May 2026,” J Michael McNutt, senior litigation advisor to Raveendran and the founder of law firm Lazareff Le Bars, said in a statement.
Raveendran’s legal woes continue
Raveendran, a former teacher who founded Think & Learn Pvt, widely known as Byju’s, was once hailed as one of India’s biggest startup success stories and a billionaire. He saw the online tutoring company collapse after a period of rapid expansion and alleged corporate governance lapses.
“Mr. maintains that he did not breach any court order, intentionally or otherwise, and will continue to pursue every lawful remedy through the proper legal process,” McNutt said.
The Byju’s founder is facing claims from foreign investors across multiple jurisdictions, including in the United States, where lenders are seeking to recover losses from a $1.2 billion loan that soured, Bloomberg News reported.
In Singapore courts, Raveendran is being pursued by a subsidiary of the sovereign wealth fund Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), which participated in a funding round for the tech firm as it was cutting jobs and laying off staff.
QIA said in a statement that it welcomes the latest ruling and will continue to pursue all legal remedies against Raveendran, the news agency reported.
Order has no practical effect unless Raveendran returns to Singapore, his law firm says
Raveendran is not presently in and there is no certainty of when, or whether, he intends to travel to the country, McNutt said.
“In the future, should he be in, or intend to travel to, Singapore, he may appeal then and the court will deal with it,” McNutt said. “The order has no practical effect unless and until he chooses to enter Singapore.”
The legal firm also noted that the bid to overturn the underlying contempt finding remains live before the Court of Appeal. “Mr Raveendran also remains entitled to seek appropriate interim relief from the Court of Appeal.”
“The stay was declined by the same court that made the underlying contempt finding, and that finding is precisely what is now being challenged before the Court of Appeal. The contempt order itself remains contested,” McNutt said.
(With inputs from Bloomberg News)