Ahmedabad Crypto Job Scam Exposes ₹33 Lakh Fraud

In a startling cybercrime incident, 35‑year‑old consultancy professional Ravikumar Ukawala from Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, lost nearly ₹32.95 lakh after responding to what appeared to be a legitimate part‑time job offer via WhatsApp. The offer led him into a fake crypto‑trading platform named mexc4.com, which showcased fabricated profits to lure victims before demanding withdrawal fees and then vanishing. This detailed 2,000‑word article unpacks how the scam unfolded, what red flags were missed, and how authorities—including CERT‑In—are involved in responding to and preventing such frauds.

1. First Contact: The WhatsApp Offer

On 9 March 2023, Ukawala received a WhatsApp message from an unfamiliar number offering a work‑from‑home opportunity, promising lucrative returns with minimal effort. According to experts in behavioural psychology, early small wins—like his ₹1,500 payment for simple online tasks—serve as trust‑building tactics, a classic step in social engineering scams.

He was given online tasks such as liking videos, rating websites, and completing forms, which came with quick partial payments like ₹1,500, encouraging him to stay engaged.

2. Escalation to Crypto Investments

Sensing his interest, the “recruiters” introduced cryptocurrency trading through mexc4.com, claiming it was backed by AI and blockchains with high profit potential. The platform had an authentic-looking UI, professional chat support, real-time graphs—mirroring actual crypto exchanges.

From March to June 2023, Ukawala invested a total of ₹32.95 lakh, transferring funds via UPI and bank transfers, convinced by the early deposits and the promise of continuing returns.

3. The Illusion of Profit

Fake dashboards displayed impressive earning figures. Notifications—“Congratulations!”, “You’ve earned ₹2 lakh today!”—were sent periodically. The scammers used gamification techniques, including timed offers and referral bonuses (“Invite 3 friends, earn ₹50 000”).

Authorities say these are common strategies used to reinforce trust and prolong the scam.

4. The Withdrawal Trap

Upon requesting a withdrawal, the platform suddenly imposed convoluted fees: “income tax”, “service charges”, and “international transfer fees”, cumulatively around ₹3 lakh. Each time Ukawala transferred the fee, the request for more followed—continuously delaying withdrawal.

Expected contact support became unreachable. Chat windows froze. The site’s login became inaccessible, confirming suspicions.

5. Red Flags That Went Unnoticed

The sophistication of the platform fooled Ukawala—common clues were:

• Unsolicited outreach via WhatsApp or Telegram.

• Over‑promising returns inconsistent with normal market behavior.

• Use of fake income tax demands disguised as official compliance.

• Non‑registration with Indian financial regulators.

• Abrupt cut‑off in communication and platform access.

6. Realization and Reporting

By late June 2023, Ukawala recognized the scam. He approached the Chandkheda Police Station and filed a complaint on 2 July 2025, nearly two years later—long after he had realized he had been defrauded. The case was registered under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (cheating, breach of trust) and the Information Technology Act.

7. Cyber Cell Investigation & CERT‑In Involvement

The Ahmedabad Cybercrime Cell, with assistance from CERT‑In—the government’s official cybersecurity authority—has begun tracing:

1. Registration details of mexc4.com

2. Bank and crypto wallet transfers

3. Identities of mule account holders benefiting from the scam

For reference on reporting and steps to take when one encounters cyber fraud, users can visit CERT‑In’s official site: CERT‑In.

8. Scam Blueprint: Understanding the Modus Operandi

Cybersecurity experts and recent reports reveal a consistent pattern:

• Target selection: educated middle‑class professionals.

• Engagement: small initial payments to foster trust.

• Scaling: promising returns lead to larger investments.

• Collapse: withdrawal barriers introduced; platform becomes inaccessible.

• Exit: scammers move on; victims are left with empty accounts.

Such scams often involve offshore servers, domain anonymity, and collaboration with mule account holders, coordinated across borders.

9. Victim Profile: Why Profound Psychological Tactics Worked

Ukawala fit the typical victim profile:

• Stable income: ₹8–10 lakh annual salary

• Poor crypto knowledge: trusted early partial payments

• Side‑income seeker: open to risk for additional earnings

• Delay in action: embarrassed, waited before reporting

Cybercrime officers warn: “Tech literate doesn’t mean scam literate.”

10. Role of CERT‑In

The Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT‑In):

• Monitors cyber threats and vulnerabilities

• Helps in blocking malicious domains

• Coordinates incident response with police

• Educates the public through alerts and advisories

Ukawala’s complaint was relayed to CERT‑In, enabling expedited domain takedown procedures.

11. Wider Landscape: Crypto Scams in India

The Crypto Scam Alert Report 2024 highlighted:

• Over ₹1,000 crore lost to crypto fraud

• 25,000+ complaints registered

• Patriarchal reliance on WhatsApp job spam, phony investment websites, and Ponzi schemes

Several victims report scenarios very similar to Ukawala’s.

12. Legal Framework: Charges & Penalties

Police have filed charges under:

• IPC Section 420 (Cheating)

• IPC Section 406 (Breach of Trust)

• IT Act Sections 66C & 66D (Identity theft, deceptive practices)

If convicted, each charge carries penalties ranging from 2–7 years’ imprisonment, including both fines and prison terms.

13. Investigation Challenges

Investigators face hurdles:

• Domain servers offshore, complicating evidence collection

• Anonymous domain registration

• Large payments laundered through mule accounts

• Cross-border suspects requiring Interpol and international collaboration

CERT‑In’s domain‑takedown capability is critical before perpetrators shift to new domains.

14. Expert Analysis & Warnings

Cyber security analyst Meera Desai states:
“These scams rely on perceived credibility. They never intend to let you withdraw—fees are just a lure.”

Behavioral expert Dr. Rajesh Patel adds:
“The small pittance in start-up payouts makes victims rationalize further investment.”

15. Recovery Chances: Tempted, but Tricky

While there are isolated cases of partial recovery through cyber police and tracking financial routes, success rates are low. Funds are often split across multiple countries in seconds, making retrieval difficult.

16. Prevention: What You Should Do

1. Ignore unsolicited offers—especially via WhatsApp

2. Research platforms—look for SEBI or RBI registration

3. Verify contact details—real organizations don’t spontaneously ask for crypto payments

4. Consult trusted sources—lawyers, financial advisors

5. Monitor early warning signs—unusual withdrawal delays, additional fees

17. Reporting Steps: Fast Response Protocol

1. Immediately stop payments

2. Gather evidence—chat histories, payment screenshots, login records

3. File FIR with the cybercrime cell

4. Raise complaint on CERT‑In website (https://www.cert-in.org.in/)

5. Inform your bank or UPI provider to freeze suspect accounts

18. Social Responsibility & Community Awareness

Indian tech communities like CyberSuraksha have launched awareness drives. UKawala has offered to speak at sessions and draft blogs to help others identify red flags before falling victim.

19. Continuing Vigilance & Follow-Up

The Ahmedabad Cyber Cell issued public advisories following Ukawala’s case. CERT‑In has added mexc4.com to its malicious domain list. Interpol is collaborating to track offshore servers and operators, and local banks are monitoring suspicious transactions.

20. Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale

Ravikumar Ukawala’s loss of ₹32.95 lakh in the crypto job scam is a grim reminder of how well‑orchestrated these frauds have become. Continued alertness, educational outreach from CERT‑In, and swift law enforcement action can help curb these scams—but only if individuals remain skeptical of promises that sound “too good to be true.”

Key Takeaways