A Bihar resident has alleged losing around ₹30 lakh after a man promised him a contractual job in the Uttarakhand Secretariat and a flat in Dehradun, but neither materialised.
Rajpur Police have registered an FIR against Abhay Kumar, a Dehradun-based man who is reported to operate a digital media enterprise.
The complainant, Ashish Kumar of Bihar’s Jehanabad district, alleged that the accused projected himself as someone with access to senior politicians and government officials and used those claimed connections to gain his confidence.
Police have booked the accused under Section 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which deals with criminal breach of trust.
No arrest has been publicly reported so far.
Proposal for Conducting Cyber Crisis Drill, Tabletop Exercise (TTEx) & CCMP Readiness Exercise
₹25 Lakh Allegedly Paid for a Government Job
According to Pioneer Edge, Ashish said he first came into contact with Abhay in Dehradun in March 2020.
The accused allegedly promised to arrange a contractual government job for him in the Uttarakhand Secretariat.
Ashish claimed he eventually paid around ₹25 lakh towards this promise.
He was later allegedly handed an appointment letter for the post of trainee district development officer.
But the promised employment never materialised.
This alleged appointment letter could become an important piece of evidence in the investigation.
If police establish that it was fabricated and was knowingly used to induce payment, the case could go beyond a failed promise and raise questions over document forgery and impersonation of government authority.
At present, police have publicly confirmed the criminal breach of trust case but have not disclosed whether the document has been authenticated or sent for forensic examination.
Another ₹5 Lakh Allegedly Taken for Dehradun Flat
The alleged transaction did not stop with the job.
Ashish claimed Abhay later showed him a flat in Dehradun and promised that an agreement for the property would be completed.
Around ₹5 lakh more was allegedly taken for this arrangement, according to Pioneer Edge.
The flat agreement was never completed.
The total alleged exposure therefore reached around ₹30 lakh.
Times of India, quoting Sub-Inspector Anil Kuntal, reported that Ashish paid the ₹30 lakh partly in cash and partly through online transfers.
That payment trail will be central to the police investigation.
Online transactions can establish dates, recipient accounts and amounts. Cash payments, however, are harder to prove and may depend on witnesses, messages, receipts or other supporting evidence.
Cheques Allegedly Bounced When Victim Sought Refund
Ashish also alleged that the accused later issued several cheques when he demanded his money back.
Those cheques were reportedly dishonoured when deposited in the bank.
A bounced cheque does not by itself prove the original fraud allegation.
But it can become useful corroborative evidence if investigators establish that the cheques were issued specifically as repayment for money collected under the job and property promises.
The complainant further alleged that he was subjected to caste-based abuse and threatened with death when he continued demanding repayment.
Those allegations have not yet been independently corroborated, and the publicly available police account does not specify whether separate legal provisions have been invoked over them.
How ‘Influence-Based’ Government Job Fraud Works
Government recruitment scams often succeed because the fraudster does not pretend to be the recruiting authority directly.
Instead, the person claims to have connections inside the system.
Victims may be told that a politician, senior bureaucrat or influential official can arrange a contractual appointment, bypass recruitment procedures or secure an internal vacancy.
That claim is difficult for a victim to immediately test because the supposed arrangement is presented as unofficial and confidential.
A fake appointment letter can make the story even more believable.
The basic warning sign is simple: legitimate government jobs are not sold through personal contacts for cash payments.
Official recruitment normally involves a notified vacancy, eligibility conditions, an application process and documentation that can be independently verified with the department concerned.
FIR Registered Under Criminal Breach of Trust
Rajpur Police confirmed that an FIR has been registered under Section 316(2) of the BNS and that the investigation is ongoing.
Criminal breach of trust broadly applies where property or money entrusted to someone is dishonestly misappropriated or used contrary to the purpose for which it was given.
Investigators will now need to establish the payment trail and examine the alleged job letter, flat promise, messages between the parties and cheques reportedly issued afterwards.
They will also need to determine whether the accused actually had any connection with Secretariat recruitment or whether such influence was allegedly invented purely to induce payment.
These remain allegations made by the complainant. The accused has not been convicted, and the facts will have to be established through investigation and court proceedings.
What this means for you: Never pay an individual who claims they can privately arrange a government job through political or bureaucratic contacts. Verify every appointment letter directly with the issuing department and insist on official recruitment channels. If money has been transferred digitally as part of a suspected fraud, preserve chats and transaction records and report the matter quickly to police or, where cyber-enabled payments are involved, through 1930 or cybercrime.gov.in.
The420 Insight: This case shows why government-job fraud is often built around claimed access rather than elaborate technology. The alleged promise combined three credibility tools: political connections, an appointment letter and a property offer. Each made the next payment easier to justify. Investigators should now focus on whether the appointment document was fabricated and whether similar promises were made to other job seekers. That will determine whether this was a one-off dispute or part of a broader recruitment-fraud pattern.
https://www.linkedin.com/company/policetechnology/
