An app that operated for roughly ten weeks in the summer of 2021 has produced a money-laundering case with 437 accused, proceeds of crime put at approximately Rs 2,200 crore, and a trail the Directorate of Enforcement says runs through payment gateways, shell companies and Chinese-linked entities.
On 30 April 2026 the ED’s Dimapur Sub-Zonal Office filed a Second Supplementary Prosecution Complaint before the Special Court for PMLA Cases at Dimapur, Nagaland. It brought 87 new accused persons on record, in addition to the 350 already named in the Main Prosecution Complaint and the First Supplementary Complaint — a cumulative total of 437.
What HPZ Token was
In the ED’s description, HPZ Token was “an app-based cryptocurrency investment scheme that lured gullible investors across India with false promises of exponential returns through investment in Bitcoin mining machines.”
The scheme commenced in June 2021. The platform was shut down in August 2021, in the ED’s words “leaving thousands of investors without access to their funds.”
Ten weeks of operation. Five years of investigation, so far.
The case file
The matter has its genesis in three separate FIRs, registered by three different agencies in three different places:
- Cyber Crime Police Station, Kohima, Nagaland
- CID Police Station, Ulubari, Guwahati, Assam
- CBI, EO-III, Delhi
On the strength of those, the ED registered an Enforcement Case Information Report — ECIR No. ECIR/GWZO-II/09/2022 — on 12 April 2022.
The complaints have been filed in sequence since:
- Main Prosecution Complaint — ML No. 01/2024, dated 4 March 2024
- First Supplementary Prosecution Complaint — 12 January 2026
- Second Supplementary Prosecution Complaint — 30 April 2026
Who the 87 new accused are
The ED describes the newly added accused as “payment gateway companies, fintech intermediaries, e-commerce entities, and their directors spread across multiple states.”
That is the notable feature of this complaint. The earlier rounds concerned the people alleged to have run the scheme. This one reaches the financial plumbing — the companies whose infrastructure moves money, and the directors who signed for them.
The alleged conspirators
The ED states that Bhupesh Arora and his associates “were alleged to be the key conspirators behind the HPZ Token Scam who have used the network of shell entities, mule accounts, hawala operators, foreign currency exchangers to launder the Proceeds of Crime collected from a huge number of gullible investors.”
Those are the ED’s words, and they are an allegation. No court has tried them.
The money
The ED puts the proceeds of crime at approximately Rs 2,200 crore. It says that during the course of investigation it has attached or frozen more than Rs 662 crore of that, as at the date of the release.
That figure is worth stating precisely, because it has been reported elsewhere as Rs 950 crore. The ED’s own release of 30 April 2026 says “more than Rs. 662 Crore.” We have followed the ED.
On the ED’s own numbers, roughly 30 paise in the rupee of the identified proceeds has been reached so far.
Why a ten-week app needed five years
The ED describes “a use of sophisticated layering techniques through a multi-tiered web of fintech companies, payment gateways, e-commerce entities, gaming companies, and cryptocurrency assets to obscure the origin of illicit funds.”
It also notes that the interconnected entities shared “common addresses, email IDs, and directors” — which, in the ED’s assessment, “points to an organised and pre-planned money laundering operation.”
The ED states that further investigation is in progress. On the arithmetic of the last two complaints — 350 accused, then 437 — the count has not finished rising.
A note on names
The individuals named on this page are identified by the role and company attributed to them in the ED’s complaint. Several are common Indian names shared by many people, including public figures who have no connection whatever to this case and are not referred to here. Any person who shares one of these names but is not a key managerial person of the specific companies named in the ED’s complaint is not among the accused and nothing on this page refers to them.
Source
Every figure, name, date and case reference on this page is taken from the Directorate of Enforcement’s press release of 30 April 2026, issued by its Dimapur Sub-Zonal Office and published on the ED’s own website. Where secondary coverage of this case differs from the ED’s document, we have followed the ED. Nothing here is drawn from an anonymous source.
Right of reply
Every company and individual named on this page is invited to respond. If any figure, date, name, designation or description here is inaccurate, write to us with the correcting document and we will publish the correction, or the response in full, alongside this article without charge and without editing its substance.
No adjudication
No court has tried or determined any of these allegations. A prosecution complaint is an accusation made by an investigating agency, not a finding of guilt. All 437 persons and entities named across the three complaints in this case are accused; none has been convicted of anything described here, and each is presumed innocent unless and until a court holds otherwise. The descriptions on this page are the ED’s allegations, reported as allegations. Nothing here asserts that any person or company committed an offence, or asserts any intent, motive, knowledge or state of mind.
Source
Directorate of Enforcement press release, 30 April 2026 (Dimapur Sub-Zonal Office): https://enforcementdirectorate.gov.in/media/press-release-documents/d5aae482-1b50-4956-b4c3-d0a043bb1d6d_Press%20Release_HPZ_Token_2nd_SPC_30042026_DMSZO-2.pdf