Raj Kundra Demands Justice In P*rnography Case, Breaks Silence: Punish Me If I’m Guilty

Actor and businessman Raj Kundra has again raised concerns about the lengthy p*rnography case against Raj Kundra, saying four years of proceedings in the lower court have already affected personal liberty and reputation, and asking that the court either punish Raj Kundra if guilty or close the matter if no offence is proved.

Raj Kundra, who is married to actor Shilpa Shetty, posted on X on April 29, 2026, that arguments by advocate Prashant Patil in the ongoing p*rnography case against Raj Kundra have finished in the trial court, stressing that the drawn-out process has become difficult to endure despite cooperation with investigators.

Key plea and arguments in Raj Kundra pornography case

In the latest post, Raj Kundra said the p*nography case against Raj Kundra has kept moving slowly for four years in the lower court, and wrote, "Four long years in the lower court in the ongoing pornography case. Today, my advocate Prashant Patil concluded our arguments. I stand by the truth if I'm guilty, punish me. If not, grant me a discharge, my freedom, and the respect taken away by relentless media trials. Justice delayed is justice denied. #Justice".

Raj Kundra added in the same context that although respect for the legal system remains unchanged, the pace of the pornography case against Raj Kundra has caused deep frustration, as Raj Kundra believes continued delay affects the core promise of timely justice and has already led to a long period of uncertainty.

Investigation history in Raj Kundra pornography case

The p*nography case against Raj Kundra began when the Mumbai Crime Branch arrested Raj Kundra on July 19, 2021, over alleged production and circulation of explicit videos, with police describing Raj Kundra as a "key conspirator" who was linked to platforms that offered adult content through paid mobile applications targeting subscribers.

According to investigators, in the p*rnography case against Raj Kundra, videos were allegedly filmed in India and then uploaded to digital platforms connected to overseas servers, which, police claimed, allowed content operators to try to avoid Indian regulatory oversight while several accused looked after filming, content management, and earning revenue.

Charges, custody and bail in Raj Kundra pornography case

The charges in the p*rnography case against Raj Kundra were filed under sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Information Technology Act, and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, with the police case stating that different individuals handled various parts of the suspected operation, from shoots to online distribution and payment systems.

Raj Kundra has consistently denied committing any crime in the p*rnography case against Raj Kundra, maintaining that the material was erotic and not pornographic, and after the July 2021 arrest Raj Kundra was placed in judicial custody before securing bail in September 2021, following around two months in jail while the inquiry and court process carried on.

Ongoing proceedings and impact of Raj Kundra pornography case

Even after release, hearings in the p*rnography case against Raj Kundra continued in the lower court, and Raj Kundra has now requested that the court either accept the defence arguments and discharge Raj Kundra or, if guilt is proven, deliver punishment, while also pointing to what Raj Kundra calls damage caused by extended media coverage and constant speculation.

Key dates and stages in the pornography case against Raj Kundra are shown below.

Event	Date	Details
Arrest by Mumbai Crime Branch	July 19, 2021	Raj Kundra held over alleged p*rnography production and distribution.
Grant of bail	September 2021	Raj Kundra released after about two months in judicial custody.
Arguments concluded in lower court	April 29, 2026	Advocate Prashant Patil finishes submissions for Raj Kundra.

The p*rnography case against Raj Kundra now awaits the lower court’s decision after arguments have ended, with Raj Kundra asking for either conviction with punishment or complete discharge, while repeating faith in the judicial process and highlighting the strain caused by a prolonged trial and by the public scrutiny surrounding the allegations.