Stock market scam: how the fraud actually runs in India

By Advocate Panchanand Shaw, Bar Council of West Bengal · Published 2 Nov 2026 · Online fraud

A stock market scam in India is rarely a bad trade. It is a stranger, a fake advisory group or an app that looks like a broker's terminal, collecting your money into accounts that have nothing to do with any stock exchange. The moment the money cannot come back, the event changes character in law: it is no longer an investment loss, it is cheating, punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and frequently also cheating by personation using a computer resource under Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

That distinction is not academic. In a genuine market loss you carry the loss. In a scam the loss was caused by somebody's crime, and the law gives you a complaint, a mechanism to freeze the beneficiary accounts, and a route to restitution. The first forty-eight hours decide most of the outcome. What follows explains how the fraud is built, which sections apply, and what a victim should actually do.

What the law says about a stock market scam

Indian law has no single section headed "stock market scam". A case is built from a combination of provisions, and the right ones depend on what the accused actually did.

Cheating. Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 defines cheating, and Section 318(4) covers cheating and thereby dishonestly inducing the delivery of property. Where a fake adviser convinces you to transfer money to a platform or an account on a false promise of profit, this is the primary section. Before the new criminal codes took effect on 1 July 2024, the same conduct was charged under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and older matters still run on those sections.

Criminal breach of trust. Section 316 of the BNS applies where money was entrusted and then misappropriated. If you handed funds to a person or an entity for a stated purpose and they simply disappeared with it, both Section 316 and Section 318(4) can arise on the same facts.

Forgery. Section 336 of the BNS covers making a false document. Fake account statements, fabricated contract notes, forged KYC records and invented profit screenshots are all false documents in this sense, and they are the paper the fraud feeds on.

Computer offences. The Information Technology Act, 2000 adds the technology layer. Section 66 covers computer-related offences; Section 66C covers identity theft, which is what has happened when your PAN, Aadhaar, photograph or digital signature is used without authority to open an account or verify a trade; Section 66D covers cheating by personation using a computer resource, which fits the fake dashboard and the fake relationship manager messaging you on WhatsApp.

Procedure. The first information about a cognizable offence is recorded under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. If the police refuse to register it, Section 175(3) of the BNSS allows you to approach the Magistrate, who can direct an investigation. Electronic records such as screenshots, chat exports, bank statements and application logs become usable evidence under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Bank liability. The Reserve Bank of India's 2017 circular on limiting customer liability in unauthorised electronic banking transactions determines how much a customer can be made to lose when money leaves a bank account without authorisation. It becomes relevant wherever the scam money passed through a bank account and the customer reported promptly.

How the fraud actually runs

The architecture is surprisingly consistent across complaints. Variations exist, but the sequence below is the one most victims describe.

1. The approach. You are added to a WhatsApp or Telegram group, or messaged privately, by someone claiming to be from a well-known brokerage, a registered research house or an institutional desk. The number may be Indian or foreign and the profile photo is stolen from a real employee.
2. The grooming phase. Free "calls" or tips are shared. Some turn out correct, often because the group is large enough that some call lands anyway, or because the administrator is moving a thin stock that the group itself is buying. A small profit is deliberately allowed to build trust.
3. The hook. You are told that institutional accounts, IPO allotments, block deals or algorithm-based trades are available only to a closed group, and that you must move money into a special account or a proprietary application.
4. The platform. You are asked to install an app from a link rather than from an app store, or to log into a website that mimics a broker. Your screen shows a portfolio that rises every day. The numbers are typed into a database; there is no exchange behind them.
5. The fee wall. When you try to withdraw, you are told to pay securities transaction tax, tax deducted at source, conversion charges, margin top-up or a withdrawal fee. Each demand is followed by a smaller request and then a larger one.
6. The disappearance. The app stops opening, the administrator removes you from the group, and the numbers stop responding.

The point to grasp is that the money left your account at step three, not at step six. Everything after that is theatre designed to keep you from reporting while the funds are moved onward through layers of accounts that are opened in other people's names.

The common variants

What decides the outcome

Four things decide whether a stock market scam complaint becomes a case with money at the end of it, and they are almost entirely within the victim's control in the early days.

Speed. The single most important factor is how quickly the beneficiary accounts are flagged. If the complaint reaches the cybercrime reporting system within the first hours, funds still sitting in the first or second layer of accounts can be frozen. Once they are withdrawn in cash or converted, recovery becomes a matter of identifying the accused and pursuing them, which is slower and far less certain.

The paper trail. Bank statements showing the debits, transaction reference numbers, UPI identifiers, the beneficiary account numbers and the application itself. A complaint built on a screenshot of a chat and a vague figure helps the police far less than one built on statements that tie each rupee to a reference number.

Whether there was a real intermediary. Money routed through a payment aggregator or a merchant account leaves a more usable trail than money sent to an individual's UPI handle. Where the victim paid by card or net banking to a merchant, the bank and the aggregator both hold records.

Who the beneficiary is. A registered entity with a bank account and KYC can be pursued; a shell account opened on a stolen identity may attach to a person who is himself a victim. Courts weigh the evidence of inducement, the falsity of the promise, and the identification of the person who received the benefit.

It is fair to say plainly that the law is more certain about the offence than about the recovery. Conviction and restitution both depend on identifying the accused; the freeze is what protects the money in the meantime.

Why the false promise is the whole case

Victims often fixate on the money vanishing and lose sight of what actually makes the conduct criminal. The offence does not depend on proving that the trades were manipulated or that the market was rigged. It depends on showing that a false representation was made, that the maker knew it was false, and that the victim parted with money because of it. In a stock market scam the false representation is the promise of profit, the assurance that the platform is a registered broker, or the invented institutional allocation that can supposedly be bought into.

This is why the description a victim gives the police matters. If the complaint reads as a disappointed investor complaining about a loss, the essential element of deception is missing and the matter drifts toward a civil dispute about money. If it states that a named platform and a named contact promised a return that did not exist and induced a transfer on that promise, Section 318(4) of the BNS is squarely engaged. The documents that carry the deception are the chat history, the advertisements, the login page and the fabricated statements, all of which should be preserved and tied to the payments they caused.

Mistakes that damage a complaint

• Paying the "tax" or "withdrawal fee". Each additional transfer enlarges the loss and delays reporting, and none of it unlocks a withdrawal.
• Deleting the application. The app, its package name, the login screen and the transaction history are evidence. Keep them.
• Reporting only to the platform. The fake platform has no office in India and no obligation to answer you; the police complaint and the 1930 report are what create legal consequences.
• Waiting for the group to "come back". Gangs routinely reopen after a break under a new name; the delay only helps them.
• Filing a civil suit without a criminal complaint. A money suit can be filed, but the freeze mechanism lives on the criminal side and is lost if the criminal complaint is not made.
• Approaching a paid "recovery agent". Recovery frauds target victims a second time; no legitimate agency charges a fee to get an FIR registered.

When to involve a lawyer

Most victims can file the first complaint themselves, and they should. A lawyer becomes useful when the police do not register the offence and a complaint to the Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS has to be drafted; when accounts have been frozen and someone needs to be shown to be a victim rather than a beneficiary; when restitution of frozen money has to be pursued; and when a person who is innocent has been named as an accused. For those stages, a cyber crime lawyer in Kolkata can draft the application and follow the case through the cyber cell and the courts, and where money has to be sued for separately, a civil litigation route runs alongside the criminal one. Start the complaint first; the legal steps work better on top of it.

Frequently asked questions

Information for general guidance only and not legal advice. Provisions cited follow the Information Technology Act 2000, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.

Related articles

• Work From Home Scam: What It Is and How It Runs
• Trading app scam: what it is and how the fraud runs
• Mutual fund scam: what it is and how the fraud runs
• Job scam in India: what it is and how the fraud runs
• Investment scam: what it is and how it works in India
• Stock market scam complaint: step by step process in India

Cyber crime lawyer in your city · Bank account freeze help · Contact