The Supreme Court today granted one month to Guangwen Kuang, an executive of Vivo Mobile Communications, to obtain a guarantee from the Chinese Consulate that he will return to India to face prosecution if allowed to travel to China to visit his ailing father.
The bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva heard the matter after the Delhi High Court refused permission for Kuang to travel to Guangzhou, China, citing the alleged proceeds of crime, his status as a Chinese national, and the absence of an extradition treaty or Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between India and China.
Appearing for Kuang, his counsel submitted that he is merely an employee of Vivo and had already provided medical certificates from Chinese hospitals regarding his 82-year-old father’s condition. The counsel requested that the respondents verify the medical condition to facilitate the process.
At the outset, Justice Kumar observed that the Court is willing to consider the request but requires a guarantee that Kuang will return to India to face prosecution. He stated, “All we need is a guarantee that you will come back and face prosecution…Why don’t you ask your consulate to support you and give a guarantee as they did in the other case? You are a Chinese national; tell them [your consulate] that your father is 82 and ailing.”
Justice Kumar further remarked that without a guarantee, it would be inappropriate to allow Kuang to leave the country. He suggested that video calls could be an alternative means of communication with his father during the interim.
The Court then adjourned the matter, directing Kuang to obtain a guarantee from the Chinese Consulate within one month. Justice Kumar added that Chinese hospitals are at par with Indian hospitals and that the Court would give the benefit of doubt to the medical certificates issued by them, noting their discipline in issuing certificates at the appropriate cost.
The Delhi High Court had earlier refused permission on 9 July 2026, relying on the alleged proceeds of crime, Kuang’s nationality, and the lack of legal frameworks for extradition or mutual legal assistance with China. Kuang approached the Supreme Court against this order, seeking relief under SLP(Crl) No. 16385/2026.
The Court’s order reflects a balance between humanitarian considerations and the necessity of ensuring the presence of the accused for trial, placing the onus on the applicant to secure diplomatic assurance for his return.
No further details regarding the nature of the money laundering allegations or the status of the underlying PMLA proceedings were disclosed in the hearing.
The matter is now listed for further hearing after the stipulated period for obtaining the consular guarantee.