The General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore has granted a stay on parts of a civil contempt order issued against Byju’s founder Byju Raveendran, providing temporary relief as he challenges the ruling through an appeal.
According to the statement, the Singapore court stayed the committal and surrender provisions of its May 25 civil contempt order after considering an application filed on behalf of Raveendran.
As a result, he is not required to surrender himself and no imprisonment term will take effect while the appeal process is underway.
The development comes after media reports suggested that an arrest warrant had been issued against Raveendran following the original court order.
The statement described such reports as false, clarifying that no arrest warrant had ever been issued against him by any court.
It added that the May 25 order only required Raveendran to appear before the court on June 15.
The contempt finding is linked to an ongoing dispute over document disclosure and other obligations related to arbitration proceedings.
According to the statement, the underlying arbitration orders are being challenged in separate legal proceedings, with efforts underway to have those orders set aside.
Commenting on the matter, J. Michael McNutt, Senior Litigation Advisor to Raveendran and the founders at Lazareff Le Bars, said the public narrative surrounding the case had been misleading.
“There was an absolutely incorrect public narrative created post the selective verbal leak of the earlier order by the Singapore Court falsely claiming an arrest warrant had been issued against Raveendran,” McNutt mentioned.
“A routine contract dispute for a loan that Raveendran guaranteed for the benefit of Think & Learn has been twisted into a false narrative of an arrest warrant. We have filed the necessary appeals to set aside this civil contempt finding and are taking further actions before the Courts,” he added.
He emphasised that there were no criminal charges against Raveendran in relation to the matter and that no court had found him guilty of fraud, dishonesty, diversion of funds or any personal wrongdoing.
Raveendran also welcomed the court’s decision, saying he remains committed to addressing what he described as a misleading narrative through legal channels.
“At a time when parties have been engaged in settlement discussions, it is unfortunate that a misleading impression of wrongdoing is being created. I remain committed to correcting this narrative through the appropriate legal process,” he said.
“Neither I nor any of the founders personally received any portion of the disputed funds. On the contrary, my family and I have put over Rs 5,000 crore of our personal wealth back into the company,” Raveendran mentioned.
