CryptocurrencyTrading: Two Arrested In 6.6 Crore Crypto Scam | Navi Mumbai News

Navi Mumbai: The Navi Mumbai cyber police team has arrested two men from Ghatkopar in a Rs 6.62 crore crypto currency trading scam. The two accused provided their bank account numbers, mobile numbers and ATM cards of others involved in the crime. The accused duo have been identified as Balu Khandagale (42) and Rajendra Patel (52). In August, the complainant stated that a woman caller befriended him and later asked him to invest in cryptocurrency trading while assuring good returns. As the complainant started investing huge amounts, he received a total of Rs 75 lakh in returns, but later stopped getting the same, the official said. George Mendonca
We also published the following articles recently

Two arrested in Rs 6.6 crore crypto scam

Two men have been arrested by the Navi Mumbai cyber police for their involvement in a cryptocurrency trading scam worth Rs 6.62 crore. The accused used the bank account details, mobile numbers, and ATM cards of others to carry out the scam. The scam was initiated when a woman caller befriended the complainant and convinced him to invest in cryptocurrency trading. After receiving initial returns, the complainant stopped receiving any further payments.

Two booked for cheating Navi Mumbai onion trader of Rs 2.07 crore

Two individuals have been charged by the police for deceiving an onion trader from Navi Mumbai of Rs 2.07 crore. The accused convinced the trader to invest in the export business promising attractive returns. They exported onions worth Rs 3.20 crore to Dubai and received the payment through an illegal money transfer system. Out of the total proceeds, the accused handed over Rs 29 lakh to the trader. The trader lodged a complaint and an FIR was filed against the accused for cheating, criminal breach of trust, and common intention.


Man loses crypto, court says trading app not to blame

A Bengalurean lost a legal battle against a crypto trading app after losing $12,484 worth of cryptocurrency. The consumer court held that the individual was a victim of cybercrime and the app was not guilty of service deficiency. The individual experienced server trouble and found that his cryptocurrency had vanished from his account. Despite lodging a complaint and attempting to claim insurance, he received no favorable response from the company. He then filed a complaint with the cybercrime unit and approached the consumer disputes redressal commission.