Delhi High Court Issues Notice On ED's Plea Against Release Of Vivo Employees In Money Laundering Case

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice on a plea moved by Enforcement Directorate (ED) against a trial court order directing release of three accused persons, including a Chinese national, in a money laundering case registered against smartphone manufacturer Vivo.

A vacation bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notice to the three accused persons namely Hong Xuquan, Harender Dahiya and Hemant Kumar Munjal, keeping in view the gravity of the case put across by the ED.

However, the court said that since the individuals had already been released in pursuance of the trial court order, no ex-parte ad-interim orders could be passed.

Keeping in view the urgency in the matter, the court listed the matter tomorrow before the roster bench.

ED has challenged an order passed by a vacation judge of Patiala House Courts on December 30 which held the arrest of the three accused persons as illegal, non-est and void. The court had also released them on bail.

However, keeping in view the apprehension expressed by ED, an additional condition was imposed upon the accused persons that they shall report in the agency's office everyday at 10 a.m. till January 03.

This was after the three individuals moved applications before the trial court challenging their arrest and custody by ED. It was their case that they were arrested on December 21 and not on December 22, as claimed by the probe agency.

While granting them relief, the trial court had observed that they were not produced before within 24 hours of their arrest and hence their custody was illegal.

As per ED, raids were conducted on Vivo India and other individuals linked to it in 2022. It was alleged that a major money laundering racket was busted involving Chinese nationals and multiple Indian companies.

It was also alleged that Rs 62,476 crore was "illegally" transferred by Vivo India to China to avoid payment of taxes in India.

Title: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. HONG XUQUAN @ TERRY AND ORS.

Click Here To Read Order