 system in particular convertible virtual currency exchanges. Then as I remember in January 2017, IDRBT, a research institute of Reserve Bank of India enlisted the advantages and disadvantages of digital currency. While the advantages indicated were control and security, transparency, very low transaction cost, the disadvantages indicated a bit of security issues and volatility. The Supreme Court held that the RBI's circular, which prevented regulated entities from providing banking services to those engaged in the trading or facilitating the trading in virtual currencies, was liable to be set aside on the ground of proportionality, on the ground of proportionality, one of the most important grounds for judicial review, ground of proportionality. Basically, many of the law students or lawyers would be able to gather this that in the test of proportionality, the courts will caution the exercise of discretionary powers in which there is no reasonable relation between the objective, which is sought to be achieved and means used to that end. The implication of the principle of proportionality is that the court will weigh for itself the advantages and disadvantages of an administrative action. And such an action will be upheld as valid if and only if the balance is advantages. If this action is disproportionate to the mischief, then it will be quashed. So that was the ground on which predominantly this circular was of Reserve Bank of India was quashed. The Supreme Court said that when the consistent stand of RBI is that they have not banned, they have not banned virtual currencies and when the government of India is unable to take a call despite several committees coming up with several proposals, including two draft bills, both of which advocated exactly opposite positions. It is not possible, Supreme Court said for us, the Supreme Court said it is not possible for us to hold that the impugned measure is proportionate. That's how the Supreme Court reached the conclusion of striking down the RBI circular. The RBI circular was struck down by the Supreme Court by considering some important facts as well in the chronology such as RBI failing to identify in the past five years or more the activities of virtual currency exchanges having essentially impacted adversely the way the entities regulated by RBI function. They were not able to establish that there was any adverse effect by these virtual currencies. The consistent stand taken by RBI being that it has not prohibited virtual currencies in the country and even the Interministerial Committee constituted in 2017 which initially recommended a specific legal framework including the introduction of a new law namely a crypto token regulation bill 2018 was of the opinion that a ban on crypto currencies might be an extreme tool and that the same objectives could be achieved through regulatory measures. Yes, that's what they felt even the Interministerial Committee. Nobody was propagating complete ban. The court noted that the position as on date in March 2020 was that the VCs were not banned, virtual currencies were not banned, but the trading in virtual currencies and the functioning of virtual currency exchanges were sent to a state of comma by the impugned or the challenged circular by disconnecting their lifeline namely the interface with the regular banking sector and what was worse? Supreme Court felt was that this has been done despite RBI not finding anything wrong about the way in which these exchanges were functioning and despite the fact that the VCs are not banned. So there was a kind of mismatch in the way RBI had proceeded. Well, I will now close my talk by summing up in few words by starting to with a court of Victor Hugo who said nothing else in the world. Not all the armies is so powerful as an idea whose time has come. So nothing can stop an idea whose time has come. Fiscal era of human race started with a commodity based barter system and then it moved on to sovereign legal tenders known as currency system and now we have this math based value system. Let us embrace it with caution and a set of regulation, caution and regulation.