Vivo's Chinese shareholders used forged driving licenses: ED to Delhi HC

The Enforcement Directorate apprised the Delhi High Court that their investigations revealed that Zhengshen Ou and Zhang Jie, shareholders of Chinese phone maker Vivo, used forged driving licenses.

New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has apprised the Delhi High Court that their investigations revealed that Zhengshen Ou and Zhang Jie, shareholders of Chinese phone maker Vivo, used forged driving licenses. As per the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) probe by the agency on February 3 against Grand Prospect International Communication Private Limited (GPICPL) -- a Jammu and Kashmir distributor of Vivo -- on the basis of a complaint filed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, the company and its shareholders had used forged identification documents and falsified addresses at the time of incorporation, the ED said in a recent counter affidavit submitted before the court.

This company was incorporated by Zhengshen Ou, Zhang Jie and Vivo former director Bin Lou with facilitation from Nitin Garg, a chartered accountant.

The Delhi-based chartered accountant firm had helped in incorporating the J&K based firm. This firm has been in touch with Vivo India since 2014. 

The ED has mentioned that Vivo India incorporated 22 firms in different states which allegedly laundered money. The Delhi-based CA firm helped Vivo India in integrating 22 firms.

Soon after the registration of an FIR on December 5 last year, the Chinese directors instead of cooperating with Indian law enforcement agencies, fled the country. Both Zhang Jie and Hongcheng Yu (directors of GPICPL) left the country on December 15, 2021, the ED said.

Th ED`s investigation revealed that Bin Lou had incorporated multiple companies all over the country spread across various states, a total of 18 companies around the same time, just after the incorporation of Vivo in 2014-15. Another Chinese national Zhixin Wei had incorporated another four companies.

In February, the ED initiated a Prevention of Money Laundering case against them on the basis of an FIR lodged at the Kalkaji police station of Delhi under sections 417, 120B and 420 of the IPC, 1860 against GPICPL and its Director, shareholders and certifying professionals etc on the basis of a complaint filed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.

The ED has said that out of the total sale proceeds of Rs 1,25,185 crore, Vivo India remitted Rs 62,476 crore. i.e, almost 50 per cent of the turnover out of India, mainly to China.