Navrangpura police have registered a case after a 41-year-old woman alleged she was defrauded of ₹1.5 crore in a flat mortgage transaction that ultimately fell apart when three repayment cheques bounced due to a signature mismatch.
How the Alleged Deal Was Structured
The complaint was filed on August 25 by Kajal Vaghasia, a resident of Bopal, against Hemang Shah, a resident of Gurukul in Memnagar. According to her complaint, Vaghasia was introduced to Shah roughly two years ago through her cousin, Rohit Chowatiya. Shah reportedly told her he needed funds and planned to raise money by mortgaging his flat, later approaching her along with his brother and allegedly offering Flat No. B/210 in Alay Tower, Memnagar, as security for the arrangement.
Shah allegedly promised to give her rights associated with the property, including usage rights, the association's share certificate, and membership rights, in exchange for ₹1.5 crore, with a commitment to repay the full amount by April 30, 2025.
The Money Changed Hands, Along with Paperwork
Acting on that assurance, Vaghasia says she issued three cheques of ₹50 lakh each from her HDFC Bank account to Shah on December 7, 2024. A notarised agreement was reportedly executed the same day in the Old High Court area of Navrangpura, formally recording the terms of the transaction. In return, Shah allegedly handed over three post-dated cheques of ₹50 lakh each, drawn on his Yes Bank account and dated April 30, 2025, the same date he'd promised to repay the full amount.
Where It All Went Wrong
When the repayment date arrived, Vaghasia contacted Shah and was told to go ahead and deposit the cheques. She did, but all three were dishonoured, allegedly because of a mismatch between the signatures on the cheques and the account holder's original signature on file with the bank.
After the cheques bounced, Vaghasia says she informed Shah and asked for replacement cheques. According to her complaint, Shah neither issued fresh cheques nor returned the ₹1.5 crore. She further alleges that the property-related commitments, the flat usage rights, share certificate, and membership transfer, were also never fulfilled, leaving her with neither the money she'd paid nor the property rights that had been promised as security.
What Police Are Now Examining
Based on the complaint, Navrangpura police have registered a case against Shah and opened an investigation. Investigators are expected to closely examine the notarised agreement, bank records, the three disputed cheques, and documentation related to ownership and other rights in the flat. Given the nature of this dispute, a thorough financial investigation into the full money trail behind the ₹1.5 crore transaction will likely be central to establishing exactly what happened and whether the arrangement was genuine from the outset.
The investigation will ultimately need to determine whether the transaction unfolded as described in the complaint, and whether the accused deliberately misrepresented either the repayment arrangement or the property rights involved. It's important to note that, as with any complaint at this stage, these allegations haven't yet been established through investigation or judicial proceedings, police continue collecting documentary and financial evidence to determine the facts and whether further legal action is warranted.
FAQs
Q1. How much money is alleged to have been lost in this case?
₹1.5 crore, paid through three cheques of ₹50 lakh each, allegedly issued in exchange for a promise of property security and repayment.
Q2. Why did the repayment cheques bounce?
According to the complaint, the bank cited a mismatch between the signatures on the cheques and the account holder's original signature on file.
Q3. What property-related promises were allegedly not fulfilled?
Rights to use Flat No. B/210 in Alay Tower, Memnagar, along with the association's share certificate and membership rights, were allegedly never transferred to the complainant.
Q4. Have the allegations in this case been proven?
No. These are allegations contained in the complaint, and police continue to investigate documentary and financial evidence before establishing the facts.