OAG looking at online gambling and tax evasion for Sandeep

2026-03-30 - 13:01

The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) is considering charging Sandeep Rai Chamling with online gambling and tax evasion in court. The RBP investigation listed seven probable charges against Sandeep, which are online gambling, misleading advertising, tampering with documents, money laundering, larceny by deception, fronting, and tax evasion. The OAG is likely to pursue only online gambling and tax evasion following a recent two to three-hour meeting with the police. Money laundering may be added later, depending on the OAG’s review of additional tax related documents it will receive from the Department of Revenue and Customs. An OAG official that the tampering with documents charged is related to tax evasion and it will be subsumed under it in one charge of tax evasion. The online gambling and misleading advertisements charge are based on the ICM Act of BICMA, while the rest of the five charges are from the Bhutan Penal Code. OAG is going ahead with the online gambling charge as there is evidence for it, as per the police investigation. Sandeep had directed his clients to online crypto gambling sites under the guise of earning Bitcoins. On why Sandeep cannot be charged with fronting, the OAG said that as per the law since the Pandora Biz license belongs to Sandeep’s uncle, it should actually be his uncle who should be charged and not the user. The OAG said since fronting is a violation that can be handled administratively, they will likely not charge the uncle to court as a criminal case. On why Sandeep is not being charged with larceny through deception and misleading advertisements, an OAG official said that Sandeep had promoted his business online and while promoting it, he had not made any specific promises of returns of specific sums of money for investing. The official said that there is even a disclaimer in his videos that it is not forced and it is voluntary. OAG said that while many of the victims complained of not being able to understand his online classes and videos after paying money, Sandeep had met the basic promise of giving online classes, and it is another matter whether the people understood it or not. The OAG said that Sandeep’s SRC was not even registered and had even been caught by BQPCA and warned the first time and fined the second time. The OAG said the victims should also have done due diligence, and OAG cannot be expected to recover money put into a bad investment. At the same time, the OAG said this is a civil case and the victims are free to approach the Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority (CCAA) or others for administrative action, or even file a civil court case to recover their money as the OAG is only looking at the criminal aspects of the case. However, the most serious charge against Sandeep will be tax evasion. So far, it has been established that he has not paid Nu 2.3 million in taxes, and this amount may increase as more information becomes available. Tax evasion is value-based for sentencing. Nu 667,600 is considered a misdemeanor, for which a fine is possible, but any amount above that is classified as a 4th degree, 3rd degree, or 2nd degree felony. Sandeep’s tax evasion could place him in the 3rd degree felony category, carrying a sentence of 5 to 9 years. Kezang Choden, the original whistleblower against Sandeep, said that the OAG is getting mixed up as while Sandeep gave some online classes related to Bitcoins and Satoshi in the Nu 2,200, Nu 1,900 and Nu 777 groups, etc., he had not fulfilled the promises made for the Nu 6,262 group with around 800 members which included USDT 10, classes, mentoring, etc. She said he only did a few sessions before his arrest. She said there are many victims looking for a refund. An official from the CCAA said that they have held back on taking any action on Sandeep as they did not want to duplicate what OAG is doing, but they will study the OAG report and look at means to get a refund for the victims. The CCAA has received 69 official written complaints, with a claimed refund amount of Nu 382,137. The RBP contacted more than 100 victims during its investigation. It is clear that the OAG is only willing to pursue the criminal aspects of the case and is leaving it to other agencies and the victims to pursue any civil matters, including the recovery of fees.