Wipro Bangladesh head, others face trial in fraud case
The three accused are Vivek Vaid, country head in Bangladesh, Wipro, Priyadarshi Ranjan, business head of South Asia of Wipro, and Kazi Ziaul Hasan, proprietor of Zimi Distribution.
A Dhaka court on Wednesday (28 February) ordered a trial to proceed against three officials from Indian company Wipro Limited and Bangladeshi company Zimi Distribution in a fraud case filed by MF Consumer Limited, a concern of the Multimode Group.
Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Begum Shanta Akter framed charges against the officials after a hearing. The court said it will set a new date for witness testimonies.
The three accused are Vivek Vaid, country head of Wipro in Bangladesh, Priyadarshi Ranjan, business head of Wipro in South Asia, and Kazi Ziaul Hasan, proprietor of Zimi Distribution.
The court rejected the bail pleas submitted by the three officials, and ordered them to appear at the next hearing, Mosleuddin Jashim, MF Consumer's lawyer, told The Business Standard.
Advocate Mohammad Ibrahim, representing the accused, told TBS that their plea to have the charges dismissed was rejected, and the court ordered the start of the trial.
In the lawsuit, filed with the Kalabagan police station in the capital in December 2022, the plaintiff alleged unauthorised imports, manipulation of product expiry dates, and fraud by Wipro in Bangladesh. MF Consumer, Wipro's distributor, also claimed the company has not settled outstanding claims.
MF Consumer had a two-year exclusive distributorship agreement with Wipro, signed in November 2012, to sell its Santoor, Chandrika, Enchanteur, and Yardley consumer care products.
According to MF Consumer officials, they repeatedly requested Wipro to settle the outstanding claims and renew the agreement, but were assured every time a settlement and renewal was forthcoming.
MF Consumer said after realising Wipro was killing time and appointed a new distributor, it sent a legal notice, demanding around Tk6 crore in November 2021.
Wipro initially attempted to have the case dismissed in the High Court, but appeals to the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division were unsuccessful. The High Court allowed the case to proceed in December 2023.