Background and Facts

The case of fraud in metal scrap transactions revolves around Mr. S, a proprietor in the metal scrap business, who became a victim of fraud by A, a self-proclaimed government contractor with alleged expertise in logistics.

In August 2020, Mr. S met A, who presented himself as a government contractor capable of providing significant business opportunities. A’s credentials and commitment to timelines convinced Mr. S to engage in business with him. At the time, Mr. S’s business was already facing a significant downturn due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In an attempt to recover from these losses, Mr. S was particularly drawn to a proposal made by A in March 2021.

A claimed to have access to a large stock of metal scrap from the Public Works Department (PWD) at a very competitive price. Given the economic downturn, this business opportunity appeared promising, and Mr. S agreed to purchase the metal scrap. He entrusted A with the responsibility of transporting the goods, as promised.

The following day, both parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to formalize the agreement. Mr. S handed over a sum of five lakh rupees as an advance payment for the purchase and transportation of the scrap. However, after receiving the payment, A continuously delayed the delivery, raising suspicion. As time passed, Mr. S realized that he had been defrauded.

Mr. S demanded that A honour the agreement, but A remained evasive. As part of his earlier assurances, A had provided Mr. S with cheques amounting to ten lakh rupees, along with a promise of an additional 10% payment. However, when Mr. S deposited these cheques, they were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Further attempts to contact A failed, and he eventually became untraceable.

Legal Proceedings

Realizing the extent of the fraud, Mr. S approached Kshetry and Associates to seek legal recourse. The legal team filed a chargesheet under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) against A for cheating and dishonesty under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Kshetry And Associates legal team diligently represented Mr. S’s interests, focusing on proving the fraudulent intent of A from the inception of the transaction. Despite the severity of the charges, A managed to avoid immediate arrest. However, due to the relentless legal efforts of Kshetry And Associates, A eventually surrendered to the authorities. Subsequently, he was granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, providing temporary relief but ensuring that A would face trial for his fraudulent actions.

Conclusion

This case of fraud in metal scrap transactions serves as a critical example of the vulnerabilities businesses face when entering transactions based on oral agreements and trust, especially during challenging economic times. The situation highlights the necessity of conducting thorough due diligence and ensuring that all business transactions are backed by legal documentation, particularly in cases involving large sums of money and unfamiliar business partners.

The proactive legal intervention by Kshetry and Associates was instrumental in addressing the fraudulent behavior of A. Though A managed to secure anticipatory bail, the legal battle was far from over, with the court proceedings ensuring that justice would eventually be served.

Also Read: Case Study: Land Acquisition And Market Value Claim Of Ms. Mondal