Wednesday, Apr 24, 2024 | Last Update : 09:52 PM IST
Customers dupe Paytm of Rs 6 lakh, CBI starts probe
It alleged that customers “illegally” appropriated money refunded in their bank accounts and wallets.
New Delhi: In a rare case, the CBI has registered a case against 15 customers of mobile wallet company Paytm after the company alleged that it has allegedly been cheated to the tune of Rs 6.15 lakh by Delhi-based customers.
According to sources, the CBI has registered FIR against 15 customers who are residents of Kalkaji, Govindpuri and Saket besides unknown officials of One97 Communications — parent company of Paytm. It is rare for the CBI to take up such cases unless they have been referred by the Central government or there are directions by the Supreme Court or a high court.
Responding to media queries seeking to know why the agency, which is already facing staff crunch, decided to take up the case, a CBI spokesperson said, “It can register cases under Information Technology Act in the territory of Delhi even against private individuals”.
The complaint from the manager legal of the digital wallet company claimed that the company makes payment for defective products received by a customer and also arranges a reverse pickup of the damaged product which is sent to the merchant. The process is done by a team of customer care executives who have been assigned specific IDs and passwords to handle such complaints from the customers and arrange refund and pickup. It is alleged that the company between 2014-16 found that in 48 cases customers had received refunds even though the delivery of orders was made successfully to them.
“As a matter of facts wherein delivery of orders were successful and satisfactory to the customer, refund should not happen. However, in all these 48 cases refund of order amount happened to the respective customers to the tune of Rs 6.15 lakh,” the complaint, which is now part of the FIR, alleged. It alleged that customers “illegally” appropriated money refunded in their bank accounts and wallets. It claimed that the acts reflects “serious” fraudulent act and foul play with common intention to wrongfully gain along with such involved customers.
