Rafomac News, Tech & Trends That MatterImagine launching a smartphone hailed as India’s own, only to have critical reviews pulled down by court orders and legal threats. That’s the explosive saga unfolding around AI Plus, a brand promising a fully made-in-India phone amid growing national pride and skepticism.
How AI Plus Claimed to Revolutionize India’s Smartphone Market
India boasts over 700 million smartphone users, making it the world’s second-largest market. Yet, approximately two-thirds of devices sold come from Chinese brands like Xiaomi, Vivo, and Oppo. This dominance set the stage for a new player to spark local pride by launching AI Plus — a phone brand championing India’s first truly sovereign smartphone, designed and built domestically, with a strong emphasis on data privacy.
The brand leaned heavily into this narrative. Their phones claimed to store user data entirely within India, using Google Cloud’s Indian servers. Bold statements about security and government certification appeared on their boot screens and marketing, while the CEO, Madhav Sheth, openly criticized competitors for relying on foreign software and updates.
Who Is Madhav Sheth, The Man Behind AI Plus?
Madhav Sheth’s résumé is impressive: former sales director at Oppo India, co-founder and CEO at Realme, and leadership roles at Honor and Alcatel India. With such a pedigree, he seemed the perfect avatar to helm a patriotic Indian tech brand. Yet his long career with Chinese-backed companies drew curious glances when AI Plus started targeting China’s smartphone stronghold so aggressively.
Pricing AI Plus Phones like the Pulse 4G at 4,499 rupees and Nova 5G at 7,499 rupees (around $47 and $79) made the devices competitive. But shortly after release, cracks surfaced.
The Chinese Apps That Shouldn’t Have Been There
YouTuber Gyan Therapy got his hands on an AI Plus phone and noticed that the operating system, branded as Next Quantum OS, looked suspiciously like Realme’s OS — definitely not an India-made creation. More troubling were three pre-installed apps—Clean Assistant, Phone Clone, and Mobile Butler—locked in and impossible to remove.
Digging deeper, Gyan Therapy uncovered disturbing facts: these apps were developed by a China-based firm called Sprocomm Technologies, which collects user data extensively. Independent experts confirmed these apps weren’t developed in India but were rebranded Chinese apps concealed within AI Plus’s claimed Indian software.
This exposed a glaring contradiction—AI Plus promised data privacy in India yet shipped phones loaded with Chinese software harvesting personal information.
What’s the Deal with Sprocomm?
Sprocomm turned out to be a low-tier ODM (original design manufacturer) in China, known for inexpensive, often lower-quality devices made using cost-cutting measures such as reused memory chips. This suggests AI Plus phones may not only be less Indian than claimed but also of inferior quality compared to major Chinese brands working with higher-tier ODMs.
AI Plus’s later launches deepened the controversy. The Pulse 2 still harbored hidden Chinese apps, while their Nova Flip phone was virtually identical to the Chinese ZTE Nubia Flip 2 — hardware, software, and even branding tied back to ZTE, with no acknowledgment beyond a subtle label on the box.
Legal Battles and the Silence of Critics
Following these revelations, YouTubers Tech Wiser and TechBar published scathing critiques, then faced severe legal pushback. AI Plus obtained ex parte injunctions banning them and others from making or hosting critical content. This tactic extended to a mysterious ‘John Doe’ defendant—essentially anyone future critics—who risk lawsuits for speaking out.
In an unprecedented move, these videos vanished from Indian platforms, though still accessible abroad. The courts accepted AI Plus’s requests without the critics present to defend themselves, a move usually reserved for urgent safety matters—not tech reviews.
A Confusing Defense from the CEO
Interviews with Madhav Sheth showed a puzzling mix of admissions and denials. He acknowledged some mistakes, claimed updated models no longer contained Chinese apps, and insisted on the brand’s Indian design credentials. However, evidence contradicted these points, with verified purchaser devices still exhibiting Chinese software months after launch.
Madhav asserted the Flip phone was sourced directly from ZTE with clear labeling, yet marketing and product launches avoided mentioning the association. On questions about AI Power, a Chinese company behind their Wearbuds, he claimed co-development and patents but failed to convincingly disconnect from its origins.
Transparency vs. Control
The AI Plus saga highlights the tension between national tech pride and commercial reality. While the brand marketed itself as a bulwark against Chinese tech dominance, multiple links suggest heavy Chinese involvement in design, manufacturing, and software.
Moreover, the aggressive censorship of negative reviewers raises alarms about freedom of speech in India’s booming tech review ecosystem. Rather than engaging critics openly, AI Plus chose legal silencing, which could intimidate smaller reviewers and stifle honest discussions.
What Comes Next?
The legal drama continues, with upcoming court dates to resolve the bounds of criticism and truth in tech reviews. Madhav Sheth has indicated regret over some heavy-handed tactics, yet the damage to trust is tangible. In a market hungry for authentic ‘Made in India’ tech, the AI Plus controversy serves as a warning: transparency and respect for criticism are vital for success, not just marketing slogans.
For those curious about smartphone innovation and tech culture in India, this case offers revealing insights into the challenges at the intersection of nationalism, quality, and freedom of expression.
