Student dupes US couple, routes money to A'bad through angadia
2
3
4
Ahmedabad: The arrest of a 25-year-old youth from Gujarat in the US has uncovered a startling transnational money trail. The student, held for duping an elderly couple from Michigan couple of $50,000, is believed to have routed the stolen amount to India through angadia (courier) and forex companies based in Ahmedabad.
Investigators believe this scheme could run far deeper, pointing to a disturbing new trend where young Indians, many on student visas, are being used as the new foot soldiers in global fraud operations. "With increasing scrutiny back home, these operatives from Gujarat have begun orchestrating similar cons directly from within the US, often using Indian students whom they either lure with incentives or threaten into joining their schemes," said authorities in the know.
"These operatives and firms, many of whom previously ran illegal call centres in Gujarat to target and defraud US citizens, are using these students as mules. The stolen cash is allegedly transferred to India through informal hawala channels, often using angadia firms. Some forex companies in Ahmedabad are also under the scanner," said an official here close to the development.
According to the police of Shelby Township in Michigan, the 25-year-old suspect, residing illegally in the Toledo area of Ohio, contacted the elderly couple through email on April 5, 2025.
He informed them that they had pending fraudulent charges related to child pornography on their credit card. Posing as an agent of the US Treasury Department, he convinced the couple to withdraw $50,000 in cash and place it in a box, which he would collect personally.
Two days later, the suspect rented a car, drove to their residence, and collected the box of cash. He instructed the couple not to inform anyone about the transaction.
The suspect was tracked by US officials using surveillance data from the FLOCK camera system, e-mail trails and phone and transport data. They identified the youth as the one who picked up the cash.
The accused from North Gujarat, was arrested in April and is currently under federal investigation for similar frauds targeting senior citizens.
The student, enrolled in a top Gandhinagar university, had travelled to Ontario in 2023 under a student exchange programme, said officials.
He later illegally entered the US. While investigators tracked him down, they uncovered a disturbing twist: he had already sent the money to India, and some operatives in Ahmedabad are believed to have received the funds. Sources said that angadia firms are likely to have been used to facilitate the money transfer.
The suspect was taken into custody in Toledo, Ohio, on April 30 and extradited to Michigan. He was arraigned on May 5 at the 41-A District Court, where his bond was set at $100,000 cash surety. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) placed a detainer on him.
He faces two felony charges: one for false pretences involving amounts over $50,000 and another for larceny over $20,000.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
14 Tamil Nadu fishermen arrested by Sri Lankan Navy, Stalin writes to S Jaishankar
14 Indian fishermen from Tamil Nadu were arrested by the Sri Lankan Navy today for allegedly crossing the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL). Along with the fishermen, their mechanised fishing boats were also response to today's arrests, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin has written to External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, urging him to take swift diplomatic measures to ensure the immediate release of the fishermen and their incident comes close on the heels of a similar episode last week, when four fishermen from Rameswaram were arrested and their boat was confiscated. On that day, about 400 fishermen had ventured into the sea from Rameswaram Fishing Port in 88 boats. While fishing in the waters between Thalaimannar and Dhanushkodi, a Sri Lankan Navy patrol vessel intercepted one of the boats. The boat, said to belong to a fisherman named Muniyasamy, was seized and the four men on board were arrested. After a preliminary inquiry, the arrested fishermen were expected to be handed over to Mannar Fisheries Department officials for further January 2025 alone, at least 185 Indian fishermen have been arrested and 25 boats seized for alleged violations of the maritime boundary.- EndsMust Watch
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Cuddalore medical student in Russia says he's being forced to fight in Ukraine; family seeks Centre's help
The last time Kishore Saravanan's family heard from him was when he sent them a frantic voice message about being forcibly sent to the warfront in Ukraine. The 22-year-old from Palayamkottai in Cuddalore district had gone to Russia to pursue MBBS. He was previously arrested by the Russian police in 2023 in an alleged drug case, according to his family. Kishore's father, J. Saravanan, said his son had sent a voice message on July 12, saying the Russian government had forcibly enlisted him to fight against Ukraine. 'I could not contact him on his phone, and his friends informed me that he was taken away by the Russian police. Though my son refused to join the Russian army, he was beaten and forced to sign a few documents. He was also given a Russian identity card and passport,' Mr. Saravanan told The Hindu. Kishore's family has urged the Union government to ensure his safe return. 'Kishore was reportedly given training for 10 days, and is now being taken to the conflict zone. Though we contacted the Indian Embassy in Russia seeking assistance, there has been no response,' Mr. Saravanan said. He said Kishore, a third-year MBBS student at Volgograd State Medical University, was arrested on May 4, 2023. 'Kishore worked part-time in an online parcel service company, and was arrested with his Indian roommate and two Russians by after drugs were found in a parcel meant for delivery. The police were trying to force him to confess to the crime, but he refused to do so. We can't contact him now, and there is no information on his whereabouts. We don't know whether he is still alive or not,' he said. When contacted, Cuddalore Collector Sibi Adhithya Senthil Kumar said the State government had escalated the issue, and the Ministry of External Affairs was in touch with the Indian Embassy. There had been no update so far, he said. VCK president and Chidambaram MP Thol. Thirumavalavan urged External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar to intervene and ensure Kishore's safe return. MDMK principal secretary and Tiruchi MP Durai Vaiko also sought the Centre's intervention. In a letter to Mr. Jaishankar, Mr. Vaiko urged him to take up the issue with the Russian government at the highest level.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Supreme Court closes loophole, puts business partners on notice
A recent Supreme Court ruling has plugged a longstanding loophole that often allowed defaulting partners of a firm to escape liability and evade prosecution on procedural grounds. In a judgment delivered on a cheque-bounce case, the Supreme Court on 14 July ruled that such partners can be prosecuted directly even if the partnership firm itself is not formally named as an accused. Setting aside a previous Madras High Court order, the apex court emphasised the fundamental legal distinction between a partnership firm and a company, reinforcing that partners bear direct, joint, and several liability for a partnership firm's actions—unlike directors of a company. A partnership firm and its partners are the same in the eyes of the law, and thus, a notice to such partners is effectively a notice to the firm, the Supreme Court clarified. Legal experts said the Supreme Court's decision would have wide-ranging implications for commercial litigation, as it strengthens the position of creditors by ensuring that individuals responsible for issuing dud cheques from partnership accounts can be held accountable more swiftly. The core of the issue rested on the interpretation of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It deals with offences by companies and also outlines the liability of partners when a firm commits an offence under Section 138, which relates to dishonoured cheques. 'Earlier, many courts had taken the view that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the partners of a partnership firm was not maintainable unless the firm itself was also named as an accused and served with a statutory notice," said Abhinav Agnihotri, partner at Burgeon Law. 'This often allowed the accused partners to escape prosecution on technical grounds." The Supreme Court's ruling dismantled this defence. 'The court reasoned that, under Indian law, a partnership firm is not a separate legal entity from its partners, who are jointly and severally liable," Agnihotri added. 'This significantly streamlines the prosecution process in cheque-bounce cases by removing a technical hurdle, making it practically easier and quicker to proceed against the individuals responsible." The ruling's distinction between a traditional firm and a limited liability partnership will be useful in interpreting other statutes like the Companies Act, said Gaurav Pingle, a company secretary. 'The Supreme Court has upheld the basic principles of corporate law—i.e., separate legal entity, perpetual succession, (and) liability of partners in relation to the liability of partnership firm under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881," he said. 'Every partner is liable' The case involved a loan of ₹21 lakh advanced by Dhanasingh Prabhu to partners in Mouriya Coirs. One partner, on behalf of the firm, issued a cheque towards repaying the loan, but the cheque was dishonoured because the firm's account was frozen. While Prabhu issued a statutory notice to two partners of Mouriya Coirs, he did not name the firm as an accused. The Madras High Court quashed the complaint on the grounds that the firm was not arraigned as an accused. Reversing this, the Supreme Court delved into the distinct nature of a partnership firm. Justice B.V. Nagarathna, writing for the bench, observed that a partnership is fundamentally different from a company. 'Partnership is merely a convenient name to carry out business by partners. Thus, a firm is not an entity of persons in law but is merely an association of individuals and firm name is only a collective name of those individuals who constitute the firm," he wrote. The Supreme Court clarified that a firm is merely a 'compendious name" for its partners. In effect, proceeding against the partners is proceeding against the firm itself. 'Every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner," the court noted, referencing Section 25 of the Indian Partnership Act. 'A complaint can validly lie against the partners without naming the firm, since the liability is personal and not vicarious," said Suvigya Awasthy, partner at PSL Advocates and Solicitors. While the Supreme Court's judgment settles a key legal question, some experts pointed to potential challenges. Awasthy raised concerns about the risk of misuse against partners who may not be involved in the day-to-day operations of a partnership firm or a specific transaction that led to a dishonoured cheque. 'Since partners in a partnership firm are personally, jointly and severally liable for the acts of the firm, a complaint under the NI Act (Negotiable Instruments Act) can be filed against all the partners, regardless of their actual role or involvement in the specific transaction," he warned.
