English
English
English
Goa Couple Duped of Rs 2.6 Crore: ED Uncovers Alleged Money-Laundering Network (Images: X)
Mumbai: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has arrested a Mumbai-based advocate in connection with an alleged digital arrest scam in which a couple from Goa was defrauded of approximately Rs 2.6 crore. A special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) has remanded the accused to ED custody until October 29, according to an official statement released on Monday. The agency identified the accused as Rashesh Bharatkumar Upadhyay, also known as Rashesh Shah. He was arrested on October 24 by ED’s Panaji Zonal Office under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
According to the agency, he was intercepted at the boarding gate of Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport while preparing to board an early-morning connecting flight to Delhi. ED said he was travelling without a return booking. Mumbai Customs and the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) assisted in the operation.
The investigation began following an FIR registered by Goa Police over an alleged digital arrest fraud. According to the ED, cybercriminals impersonated officials of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to intimidate the Goa couple. The woman was allegedly kept under continuous video surveillance and shown a forged Supreme Court order.
The fraudsters allegedly pressured the victims into transferring around Rs 2.6 crore to bank accounts described as “Secret Supervision Accounts”, falsely presenting the transactions as part of an official process. The ED subsequently traced the suspected proceeds through more than 400 mule bank accounts to a wider network involving commodity trading, travel and foreign-exchange companies. The agency alleged that the network was controlled by Fahim Moin Hussain Sayed and Naim Mueen Sayyed through dummy directors.
According to ED, Upadhyay allegedly played a significant role in helping the network regain access to bank accounts frozen by law enforcement agencies following cyber fraud complaints. The agency claims that he coordinated suspected cash bribes to officials, routing payments through angadiyas, or informal money-transfer intermediaries. He allegedly determined the amounts, collection locations and onward movement of the money. ED said the accused admitted to arranging the unfreezing of approximately 100 bank accounts for various agents. In one instance, the alleged payment exceeded Rs 60 lakh.
Investigators further alleged that these activities continued even after ED searches were conducted. The agency said the accused deleted chats with co-accused individuals, switched off his known mobile numbers and subsequently attempted to leave Mumbai. ED also stated that, despite being enrolled as an advocate, he had not appeared in court or filed vakalatnamas on behalf of the co-accused or their companies. The agency alleged that his professional standing was used as a cover for facilitating bribe payments and securing access to suspected proceeds of crime.
The allegations are part of the ongoing investigation and have not been established as findings of guilt by a court.
ED has alleged that the wider network conducted banking transactions amounting to nearly Rs 28,000 crore and deposited approximately Rs 2,900 crore in cash. According to the agency, accounts associated with the network have surfaced in more than 300 complaints and over 160 FIRs registered across 20 states and Union Territories. The complaints reportedly involve losses exceeding Rs 400 crore.
These figures relate to the wider network under investigation and should not be confused with the Rs 2.6 crore allegedly taken from the Goa couple.
Upadhyay’s arrest is the seventh in the case. ED had previously arrested six people, including the two alleged controllers of the network, Fahim Moin Hussain Sayed and Naim Mueen Sayyed, along with agents suspected of arranging banking transactions and the release of frozen accounts.
The agency said its investigation is continuing to identify officials who allegedly received bribes, trace the role of intermediaries and establish the full extent of the suspected proceeds of crime. The case highlights how digital arrest scams can extend beyond impersonation and intimidation, potentially involving complex financial channels designed to move and conceal money obtained through cyber fraud.
