Money collected from investors does not stay where it lands. The Directorate of Enforcement’s complaint sets out where it says the HPZ Token proceeds went next — and names eight companies along the way.
The two accounts that were analysed
The ED states that “The analysis of the accounts of Shigoo Technology Private Limited and Lillian Technocab Private Limited, which have been mentioned in the previous complaints, has established that the Proceeds of Crime were further transferred to shell and dubious entities…”
Both companies had already appeared in the earlier complaints. What the second supplementary complaint adds is where the money went from there.
The six onward entities
The ED names them as:
- M/s Digi India Marketing
- M/s Analytiq Business Ventures Private Limited
- M/s Freebie Solutions Private Limited
- M/s Truvinta Solutions Pvt. Ltd
- M/s Zavion Trading Pvt. Ltd
- M/s Sark Enroll System Private Limited
The ED’s release adds “etc.”, so the list as published is not exhaustive. It describes all of them as “found to be allegedly controlled by Bhupesh Arora and his associates.”
A note on these names
Several of these companies have been reported elsewhere under different spellings — Shigoo Technology as “Shine Technology”, Analytiq Business Ventures as “Analytix” or “Analytic”, Truvinta Solutions as “Durvinta”, Zavion Trading as “Zevian”.
The spellings above are the ED’s own. In reporting that names companies as recipients of alleged proceeds of crime, getting the name right is not a matter of style. A misspelling can implicate a different company entirely.
The mechanism the ED describes
Read alongside the rest of the complaint, the trail has a shape: collection from investors, movement through payment infrastructure, distribution into entities the ED characterises as shells, and onward layering through what it calls “a multi-tiered web of fintech companies, payment gateways, e-commerce entities, gaming companies, and cryptocurrency assets to obscure the origin of illicit funds.”
The ED also records that several of the onboarded concerns “were not found operating at their registered addresses”, and that directors of the bogus concerns “were dummy directors who have been paid meagre amounts for lending their names as Directors.”
Where this stands
The ED puts the proceeds of crime at approximately Rs 2,200 crore and says it has attached or frozen more than Rs 662 crore. Further investigation, it states, is in progress.
None of the companies named above has been convicted of anything. These are the allegations in a complaint that the Special Court for PMLA Cases at Dimapur has yet to try.
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