New Delhi: The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has instructed the Bureau of Immigration to issue a lookout notice against Byju Raveendran, the progenitor of the embattled edtech enterprise, Bjyu’s, according to insider sources. The objective is to impede Raveendran’s potential departure from the country.

Allegedly, this development precedes a momentous Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) slated for this upcoming Friday. Reports suggest that a faction of investors aims to displace Raveendran from his current leadership role. On Wednesday, the Karnataka High Court issued a directive urging Byju’s stakeholders to refrain from implementing any resolutions during the EGM until the conclusive hearing. This order ensued from a plea filed by Byjus, urging the court to prohibit shareholders from convening the EGM.

While the court has not suspended the EGM, it has temporarily suspended any resolutions until the conclusive hearing, scheduled for March 13. Among the challenges confronting Byju’s is the accusation of foreign exchange transgressions, prompting the central agency to advocate for the issuance of a Look Out Circular (LOC) against Raveendran. “The Enforcement Directorate, in November 2023, served show cause notices to Byjus for contraventions under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), totaling Rs 9362.35 crores.

The ED commenced its investigation following numerous complaints regarding the foreign investments received by Think and Learn Private Limited, the corporate entity of Byju’s, and the business practices of the company. The enterprise was also purported to have executed substantial foreign remittances outside the Indian borders and investments abroad, allegedly violating provisions of FEMA, 1999, resulting in financial loss to the Government of India, as previously articulated by the ED.

“Upon the conclusion of the inquiry, it was discerned that Think & Learn Private Limited and Byju Raveendran breached FEMA provisions by neglecting to furnish documentation for imports against advance remittances made outside India, failing to actualize proceeds from exports outside India, delayed submission of documents concerning Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) received by the company, overlooking document filing for remittances made outside India, and neglecting the allocation of shares against FDI received by the company,” as previously asserted by the Enforcement Directorate.