SC cancels bail in Chinese app fraud case, rejects co-accused plea

The Supreme Court cancelled bail for Bhupesh Arora and denied it to Rohit Vij in a money laundering case linked to fraudulent Chinese apps. The court ruled that compromise in the predicate offence doesn't extinguish PMLA proceedings.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cancelled the bail granted to Bhupesh Arora in a money laundering case linked to alleged fraudulent Chinese investment apps and rejected the bail plea of co-accused Rohit Vij. A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Prasanna B Varale passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The Court observed that a compromise in the predicate offence does not by itself extinguish the underlying criminal activity relevant to proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Arora had earlier secured bail after the criminal case relating to the scheduled offence was compromised and subsequently quashed.

Details of the ED Investigation

The case arose from an ED investigation into an alleged network involving fraudulent investment apps, including LOXAM, which allegedly lured investors with promises of high returns.

According to the ED, the proceeds generated through the apps were routed through multiple bank accounts and entities before being converted into cash and foreign currency and allegedly sent overseas through hawala channels.

Alleged Role of Rohit Vij

The ED has alleged that Rohit Vij played an operational role in the movement of the funds. According to the prosecution case, Vij was involved in entities including Ranjan Moneycorp Pvt. Ltd. and KDS Forex Pvt. Ltd., through which the alleged proceeds were converted from bank transfers into cash and foreign currency before being moved through alleged hawala channels.

Alleged Role of Bhupesh Arora

Bhupesh Arora, on the other hand, has been alleged by the ED to have played a higher-level role in the network. The agency has linked him to shell entities and alleged that he was involved in the placement, layering and integration of the proceeds of crime. The ED has also relied on statements alleging that cash or foreign currency converted through the network was delivered to Arora on certain occasions.

The investigation has also referred to alleged links with Chinese and Taiwanese nationals who were purportedly involved in setting up companies and bank accounts used for routing funds generated through such apps.

The Delhi High Court had granted Arora regular bail in February 2026. While considering his plea, the High Court examined the effect of the quashing of the predicate offence on the subsequent PMLA proceedings.

In the connected matter concerning Vij, the Supreme Court rejected his bail plea.

The proceedings against both accused arise from the ED’s probe into the alleged laundering of proceeds generated through the fraudulent investment-app network.

The ED was represented by Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik and advocate Arkaj Kumar. Senior advocate Mukta Gupta appeared for Arora, while senior advocate Siddharth Aggarwal appeared for Vij.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianetnews Editorial staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)