Vivo money laundering case: Delhi Court grants bail to alleged ‘main mastermind’

Additional Sessions Judge Kiran Gupta, while granting the accused bail, ruled that Garg had no involvement in the activities and operations of the 19 companies after their incorporation in 2014.

Advocates Aman Sharma, Samarth K Luthra, and Ankit Bhatia representing the accused argued that Garg was not a beneficiary of the alleged gains in the case and was merely extending his professional services of incorporating the 19 companies for which he was given a fees of Rs 19 lakh.

The ED on the other hand argued that Garg “knowingly incorporated” the distributor companies of Vivo India which helped in siphoning off funds from India to China. Garg was in contact with the Chinese Government prior to 2014, the agency stated. They also said that the accused might flee from India if granted bail.

The agency alleged that certain shareholders in a company called GPICPL (Grand Prospect International Communication Pvt. Ltd.), which was allegedly made to conduct fraudulent activities, had used forged documents and fake addresses.

On behalf of Garg, senior counsel Sidharth Agarwal argued that the accused never forged the documents.

“….the forgery, if any, was subsequent to the incorporation of these companies and none of the documents used for obtaining the forged documents were signed/attested by the applicant,” ruled ASJ Gupta, pointing out that she was satisfied that Garg was unlikely to commit any offence while on bail.

In October, the ED had arrested four persons, including a Chinese national and the MD of Lava International mobile company, in connection with the case. Along with Garg, another CA was also arrested.

According to the chargesheet earlier accessed by The Indian Express, multiple entities under the control of Vivo China resorted to using forged identity documents to acquire wrongful gains for themselves “to the detriment of Indian laws and economic sovereignty of the country”.

It was also alleged in the chargesheet that Vivo China fraudulently “established a complex centrally controlled structure all over the country under the corporate veil of Vivo India and concealed the true nature of their ownership and control.” The complex corporate structure was used by Vivo China to acquire proceeds of crime over Rs 20,241 crore.