 "Vivo")
The Delhi High Court on Thursday permitted a distributor of Vivo Mobile to operate its bank account. The bank account of the distributor was frozen by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in July 2022.
Justice Yashwant Varma allowed M/S Grand Prospect International Communication Private Limited to operate its bank account. The company has been directed to maintain the credit balance as of the date of freezing of the bank account. The Court has also restrained the company from repatriating money abroad.
The bench also issued notice to the ED on the petition moved by the company. The Court directed ED to file an affidavit on the plea. The matter has been tagged with the other matter listed on September 20, 2022.
The bench said " In the meanwhile, and bearing in mind the interim directions which were passed on the aforesaid writ petition as well as the orders passed on the other writ petitions preferred by other dealers of Vivo Mobile, the Court provides in the interim that while the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the bank accounts which stand freezed pursuant to the order challenged, it shall ensure that a credit balance of Rs. 10,45,94,868.9/- is maintained at all times."
The Court also directed that the petitioner to furnish statements of accounts of all the bank accounts forming the subject matter of the freezing order every 48 hours to the ED.
Also Read
The Court further restrained the petitioner from repatriating any proceeds which may come to be credited to the subject bank account outside the country till the next date of listing.
Senior advocate Dayan Krishnan on behalf of the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a distributor of Vivo mobile for the Jammu and Kashmir, Laddakh. Its bank account was freezed on 5 and 6 July, 2022 without giving any notice. The amount of Rs. 10 crores was in the account on the date of the freeze.
It was submitted that the account is debit frozen. The permission should be granted to operate the account to meet the expenses.
On the other hand advocate, Zohaib Hossain opposed the petition saying that the petitioner is the company which committed the scheduled offence. The petitioner should not be allowed to operate its bank account.
He submitted if the permission is granted, the petitioner should be put on the term to not repatriate abroad. Secondly, the directors who were summoned will join the investigation.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
