Key Highlights
- A Mumbai officer working at the Malaysian Consulate lost ₹79 lakh to a WhatsApp crypto scam, highlighting risks even for experienced investors.
- Courts stress custodial interrogation in crypto frauds, showing scammers exploit tech and legal loopholes to cheat victims.
- High-value scams, like Hyderabad’s $21M USDT theft, reveal carefully planned attacks using fake sites and malicious smart contracts.
An immigration officer posted at Malaysia’s Consulate in Bandra West, Mumbai lost nearly ₹79 lakh in a cryptocurrency scam. The 41-year-old victim approached police only a year and a half later, citing severe mental stress and fear of social stigma.
As per a local report, the fraud began with the officer, who had some knowledge about how the markets work, joining a WhatsApp group named “EG Plan” in January 2024, that provided tips on stocks and crypto. Initially, the group seemed genuine, and the victim followed their advice to register on a trading website.
Over time, he ended up sending money to more than 18 different bank accounts using online transfers and RTGS. To gain his trust, the platform even returned ₹1.69 lakh to him initially. Feeling encouraged, he kept investing between April 2024 and June 2025, eventually transferring a total of ₹78.85 lakh.
The turning point came when he tried to withdraw his funds. The fraudsters demanded an additional ₹18 lakh as a “processing fee.” When the officer refused to pay this amount, all communication abruptly stopped. The victim eventually filed a complaint with police based on his bank’s advice. The case has been registered under cheating, criminal conspiracy, and IT Act provisions. Investigators are tracing the bank accounts where the funds went and identifying the account holders.
An alarmingly growing scam trend
Besides this case, high-value crypto scams are rising in India. Just this month, the Supreme Court denied anticipatory bail to chartered accountant Bhaskar Yadav, linked to a ₹640 crore cyber fraud. The Delhi High Court pointed out the “intricate mesh of laundering of money” and stressed that custodial interrogation was necessary for the investigation. Justices M M Sundresh and Augustine George Masih emphasized that the case went beyond legal crypto trading, noting that liability is limited to paying taxes on crypto profits.
Similarly, the Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected anticipatory bail for a person involved in a “digital arrest” cyber fraud. Investigators traced part of the stolen ₹2.65 crore into crypto transactions. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj said, “The petitioner has taken undue benefit of technology and actively participated in the offence of cheating.” These cases show how scammers exploit technology and legal gaps to trick victims.
In Hyderabad, three people stole over $21 million USDT using a fake KYC website called Trontag.org. The victim unknowingly connected his Tron wallet to the site and approved a harmful smart contract, which transferred all his funds.
These incidents there show that scammers are getting smarter, mixing tricky social tactics with confusing financial terms to seem trustworthy. Authorities have advised users to remain alert and to avoid delaying reporting such crimes.
Also Read: Australian Exec Accused in Russian Espionage Plot for $1.27M in Crypto
