Speak Asia CEO Manoj Kumar posted a YouTube video on December 27th, offering an explanation for the company's silence amid mounting scrutiny. Kumar, speaking in Hindi in the original upload, argued that Speak Asia could not issue statements because many matters were "sub judice," meaning under judicial consideration and prohibited from public discussion. An English translation later appeared, provided by members of AISPA.

Kumar’s statement asserted that public comments during sub judice proceedings amounted to interference with the legal process. The term "sub judice" specifically applies to matters actively before a court, where public discussion could prejudice a fair hearing. However, Speak Asia is currently involved in four distinct court cases, and this defense does not apply to all of them.

The first case, Speak Asia vs. the CID, was postponed until February because respondents were not properly served. A judge has not yet heard the case, so nothing is under judicial consideration. Two additional cases, lodged in the Mumbai High Court, are Speak Asia's attempts to stop police investigations. These have been adjourned without a proper hearing, leaving no legal matters for the court to consider at this point.

The fourth case involves a writ from Solomon James. While mediator Ramesh Lahoti reportedly ordered silence during the mediation, the process is widely understood to be complete. Lahoti is expected to submit a report, after which the Supreme Court will schedule a hearing. This specific case might fall under the "sub judice" definition. But it has no bearing on the Economic Offenses Wing (EOW) criminal investigation, which has been the focus of recent media reports.

Kumar used the "sub judice" excuse to explain the company's lack of communication. But this legal argument fails to address the EOW's criminal investigation. Kumar himself then defined the core issue, stating he had read reports in the Mumbai Mirror, Times of India, and other publications over the past two to three days, calling them "the height of false allegations against the company." All three of these articles directly quoted the EOW on the progress of its criminal investigation. The EOW's ongoing criminal investigation, apart from the arrests of Melvin Crast, remains separate from judicial process.