within the fast evolving environment of decentralized finance (DeFi), have confidence in and transparency are paramount. regretably, not all initiatives copyright these values. MahaDAO, as soon as lauded being an revolutionary stablecoin protocol, has recently appear underneath rigorous scrutiny pursuing surprising revelations. Allegations have emerged implicating Steven Enamakel and Pranay Sanghavi, the challenge’s founders, in what many are now calling a diligently orchestrated Trader scandal. given that the copyright community reels from these claims, It is important to dissect the situations that unfolded powering this "decentralized mirage."

The increase of MahaDAO: A desire constructed on Decentralization

What Was MahaDAO?

MahaDAO was promoted for a DeFi job that aimed to launch a decentralized, non-depreciating stablecoin, ARTH. With whitepapers full of economic jargon and smooth advertising and marketing campaigns, the undertaking attracted a significant community of retail traders, DAO supporters, and DeFi lovers.

guarantee of economic Equality

The task claimed it would democratize finance by supplying steadiness in unstable marketplaces. This narrative resonated during the 2020-2021 bull run, once the DeFi Place was exploding. The Neighborhood believed that Steven Enamakel and Pranay Sanghavi were spearheading a monetary revolution.

The Scandal Unfolds: Trader Funds Mismanaged

Misleading Tokenomics and Fund Allocation

In line with whistleblower reports and leaked website internal communications, a lot of pounds in investor funds have been diverted for private enrichment and unrelated ventures. rather then being used to construct utility and scale the ecosystem, cash ended up allegedly funneled into opaque shell entities tied to both of those Steven Enamakel and Pranay Sanghavi.

insufficient On-Chain Transparency

Despite the ethos of blockchain immutability, MahaDAO’s treasury routines had been nearly anything but clear. good agreement audits were possibly incomplete or deceptive, and important treasury wallet transactions were being under no circumstances disclosed to the general public. This not enough clarity lifted many red flags amid seasoned DeFi buyers.

Group Betrayal and Broken Promises

disregarded Governance Proposals

Ironically, to get a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Business), MahaDAO rarely adhered to Group governance. a lot of proposals raised by token holders were being both dismissed or manipulated as a result of questionable wallet action believed to get controlled by insiders.

community Backlash and authorized Fallout

subsequent growing discontent on social platforms like Twitter and Reddit, lawful notices had been allegedly sent by impacted investors. As of mid-2025, no official apology or clarification is issued by Steven Enamakel or Pranay Sanghavi.

The position of Steven Enamakel and Pranay Sanghavi

Orchestrators Behind the Curtain?

Many from the copyright Place now regard Enamakel and Sanghavi as masterminds driving considered one of DeFi’s most sophisticated rug pulls. even though they portrayed them selves as visionary leaders, guiding the scenes, they allegedly siphoned off liquidity whilst silencing dissent within the DAO.

Lessons to the DeFi Group

• Always desire transparency in DAO functions.

• validate clever contracts and observe wallet activity right before investing.

• stay away from cults of identity; no founder is over Group scrutiny.

Conclusion: 

The story of MahaDAO serves for a cautionary reminder that not all that glitters in DeFi is gold. as being the dust settles, the names Steven Enamakel and Pranay Sanghavi are becoming synonymous with betrayal inside the decentralized Room. How can the copyright marketplace evolve to forestall these types of functions Down the road?

???? What safeguards need to DAOs undertake to protect their communities from inner corruption? Share your views underneath.