Introduction
The client had transferred money in three instalments to what appeared to be a regulated trading platform. When withdrawals were refused, he reported the matter on 1930 and the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. Ten days later, his salary account was frozen on the instruction of a cyber cell in another state: a small sum from an unrelated victim had been routed through his account by the same syndicate.
He came to us with two problems that looked like one: money lost, and money he could not reach.
The Approach
We separated the two matters. On the fraud, we re-filed the complaint with the transaction chain documented in the order the bank's nodal officer needed, and pursued the hold on the receiving accounts. On the freeze, we obtained the freezing order's particulars, prepared the client's KYC and salary-credit history, and moved the concerned Magistrate for release of the lien on the amount not connected to the disputed transaction.
Communication with the out-of-state cyber cell was handled in writing, with every request and reply preserved for the record.
Testimonial
“I was told on the first day which of the two problems could be solved quickly and which could not. That honesty is why I stayed.”
Results
Lien released
Salary account operational after the Magistrate's order
FIR registered
Complaint registered and receiving accounts placed under hold
The lost amount remains the subject of the criminal investigation; the client's own account was released and the complaint is being prosecuted. The lesson we repeat to every cyber-fraud client: the freeze and the fraud are separate proceedings, and each has its own clock.
Illustrative matters. Facts, names and identifying details have been changed or combined to protect client confidentiality. No outcome in any past matter is a promise about any future matter.
When To Call Sarvā Nyāy
If you are facing something like this, the first conversation is about what to preserve and where to file. It is without charge and without obligation.
