Bitcoin fraud case
Order for payment of Rs.3 lakh with interest
Belgaum.
In connection with the Bitcoin case, the Second District Consumer Redressal Forum here has ordered the Punjab National Bank to pay around Rs 3 lakh 82 thousand as compensation to the victim along with 6% interest. Sukrita Rajendra Kulkanari of Belgaum lost Rs.3,82,230 in online fraud case. Ordered the bank to pay Rs 10,000 with interest and mental anguish and Rs 5,000 for expenses incurred on court proceedings.
A person who introduced himself as a representative of a company called Wazire had sent a mobile message saying that if he invests in the Bitcoin business run by the company, he can make more money soon, and in the month of May last year, he had deposited Rs.3,82,230 from pretioner to the Punjab National Bank account step by step.
Sukruta Kulkarni filed a complaint at the city’s cyber police station when the invested money did not return. Not only that, the amount of Rs.2,32,327 that was transferred to the Punjab National Bank account of the fraudsters was stopped.
Not only that, an order was issued to the bank by the court of judicial magistrate for an order to recover the money.
But when the money did not come back from the bank even after many months, the sukruta went to the consumer forum when they sent a legal notice and RTI to the bank but did not get any response.
sukruta”s suit was admissible for hearing as Punjab National Bank had failed to prevent payment of money to the accounts of fraudsters in pursuance of the RBI circular determining the liability of banks in cases of fraud on the law and on the Supreme Court ruling on the scope of consumer noise.
Disregarding the arguments of the defendants that the pritishioner are not bank customers, the bank is not a suitable defendant, the appropriate defendants have not been named, and the bank is not responsible for the fraud, Consumer Forum President Sanjeev Kulkarni and member Girish Patil have awarded the sukruta petition and issued an order against the bank. Advocate R V Kulkarni argued on behalf of the pritishioner.
