Kannada Actress Ranya Rao Released After 1-Year Detention Under COFEPOSA Act In Gold Smuggling Case
Kannada actress Harshavardhini Ranya Rao was released from Central Prison, Mysuru on Wednesday (April 22) after completing her 1-year detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities (COFEPOSA) Act in a case pertaining to alleged gold smuggling.
For context, the actress was granted bail by the Special Court in a case booked for gold smuggling in May 2025. However, the bail order couldn't be enforced due to the continuing one-year detention under COFEPOSA Act.
The detention order under COFEPOSA Act was passed while the actress was in judicial custody after being arrested by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on allegations of smuggling gold and booked for offences u/s 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b), 135 (1)(a)(i)(a) 135(1)(a)(i)(b), 135(1)(b)(i)(a), 135(1)(b)(i)(b) of the Customs Act.
On Thursday (April 23), Special Court for Economic Offences Judge Vishwanath Goudar was informed that the actress had been released from prison on Wednesday after completion of formalities.
The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) had seized gold bars worth ₹12.56 crore from Ranya at Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru on March 3, 2025. A subsequent search of her home had yielded gold jewellery worth ₹2.06 crore and Indian currency amounting to ₹2.67 crore.
On April 17, two sureties appeared before Judge Goudar and filed affidavits along with property documents. The court perused the RTC records, mutation register extracts, and Aadhaar cards, and after questioning the sureties, expressed satisfaction and accepted the sureties. The court had directed to intimate the jail authorities to release the actress if she is not required in any other case.
The matter will be called next on May 16.
Notably, the Karnataka High Court had in December 2025 dismissed the petition filed by the actress's mother seeking to declare her detention under COFEPOSA Act as illegal and void-ab initio.
The petitioner had then argued before the High Court that in accordance with Law and the Constitution of India, the detenu was required to have been furnished with the Grounds of Detention and relied upon documents along with the Order of Detention, and the same was not provided to the detenu.
Case title: The Senior Intelligence Officer v/s Harshavardini Ranya
PCR 320 of 2025