On an ordinary working afternoon in Mumbai, a sitting judge saw a faint pink line bleed across his phone screen and did what most of us would do: he went looking for help. The help that found him was counterfeit, arriving by phone and then through a file passed along a messaging app, and it turned a small repair into a loss of ₹93,000. It is a reminder of how easily trust in a familiar brand can be borrowed, and how a fault in a device can open a door into a life's savings. The police have opened a case against someone not yet named, and the questions now are who stood behind the voice and whe
Mumbai Judge Loses ₹93,000 to Fake Samsung Support App Scam
A judge lost ₹93,000 from his bank account and his banking data was compromised.
The ₹20 was minor; the APK was what mattered.
Mark
Why does a story about ₹93,000 matter? That's not a huge sum.
Mimi
Because of how it happened. He didn't ignore a warning or click a strange link out of nowhere. He had a cracked-looking screen, searched for help, and someone called back within hours.
Luke
Careful, though. The report says he searched online and found a number, then got a call from a different number. We don't know how the fraudsters got his details or whether the number he found was itself fake.
Mark
So the link between his search and that call is unclear?
Mimi
Yes. The report states the sequence but not the connection.
Mark
What was the ₹20 payment for?
Mimi
The caller said it was to register the complaint. It made the whole thing feel like routine service procedure.
Luke
And police say the APK is what gave access to his banking data. That's the police account; the report doesn't describe the technical mechanism.
Mark
What about the name tied to the UPI ID?
Luke
It's allegedly linked to Pappu Sachin Yadav. That's not an identified suspect. The FIR is against an unidentified accused, and nobody has been reported arrested.
Mimi
Which is why the next step is tracing that account and the two transfers, ₹90,000 and ₹3,000.
Mark
Is there any word on recovering the money?
Luke
Not in the reporting. That's still unknown.
The Pulse
- A pink line on a Samsung screen sends a judge searching for support, and the first call goes unanswered.
- A stranger claiming to be from Samsung arrives within hours, asking him to download an app that turns out to be malicious.
- Two small Google Pay payments of ₹10 each look like routine paperwork, lending the exchange a convincing air of normalcy.
- By nine that night, ₹93,000 has left his State Bank of India account for a UPI ID allegedly tied to Pappu Sachin Yadav.
- Police have registered an FIR at Tardeo Police Station against an unidentified accused, and investigators are tracing the transfers.
- The case may become a warning to officials and the public about fake customer-care apps.
On an ordinary working afternoon in Mumbai, a sitting judge saw a faint pink line bleed across his phone screen and did what most of us would do: he went looking for help. The help that found him was counterfeit, arriving by phone and then through a file passed along a messaging app, and it turned a small repair into a loss of ₹93,000. It is a reminder of how easily trust in a familiar brand can be borrowed, and how a fault in a device can open a door into a life's savings. The police have opened a case against someone not yet named, and the questions now are who stood behind the voice and where the money has travelled.
On March 30, a 46-year-old judge at the Small Causes Court in Mumbai noticed a pink line across the display of his Samsung S22. He was at work, and he did what anyone might do: he searched online for customer care, found a number, and tried to call. No one helpful answered.
Around 5:21 pm, a call came from a different number. The caller said he represented Samsung. To fix the screen and arrange a replacement, the judge was told, he needed to register an online complaint and download a support application. The caller sent an APK file over WhatsApp, and the judge installed it. Police at Tardeo Police Station say the file was malicious and gave the fraudsters access to his banking data.
The caller then asked him to send ₹10 twice through Google Pay to register the complaint. He paid ₹20 in total, and messages assured him his request was in progress, giving the exchange the feel of an ordinary service ticket.
The discovery came that night. Around 9 pm, back home, he found two debits from his State Bank of India account, ₹90,000 and ₹3,000, together ₹93,000. The money had gone to a UPI ID allegedly linked to Pappu Sachin Yadav. He called the cyber helpline 1930, then went to the police.
An FIR is registered against an unidentified accused, and the investigation continues. No one has been identified or arrested, and the name tied to the UPI ID is currently an allegation about where the money went, not a finding about who ran the scam. What matters now is whether investigators can trace the recipient and the two transfers, and whether the case prompts wider warnings about fake customer-care apps.
On March 30, a 46-year-old judge at the Small Causes Court in Mumbai noticed a pink line running across the display of his Samsung S22. He was at work. He did what many people would do: he searched online for customer care support, found a number, and tried calling it.
He did not get through to anyone helpful then. But at around 5:21 pm, a call came in from a different number. The caller said he represented Samsung customer care. To fix the screen and arrange a replacement, the caller said, the judge would need to register an online complaint and download a customer support application.
The caller then sent an APK file over WhatsApp. The judge, who lives in the Government Officers' Colony near Haji Ali in Tardeo, downloaded it. According to police at Tardeo Police Station, that file was malicious, and installing it gave the fraudsters access to his banking data.
The caller next asked him to send ₹10 twice through Google Pay, supposedly to register the complaint. He paid a total of ₹20. Messages followed telling him his request was in progress, which gave the exchange the look of an ordinary service ticket.
The discovery came later that night. Around 9 pm, after reaching home, he checked his account and found two debits from his State Bank of India account: ₹90,000 and ₹3,000, together ₹93,000. When he looked into the transactions, he found the money had gone to a UPI ID allegedly linked to a person named Pappu Sachin Yadav.
He contacted the cyber helpline 1930 and then went to the police. An FIR has been registered at Tardeo Police Station against an unidentified accused, and the investigation is continuing. Police have not said that anyone has been identified or arrested, and the name tied to the UPI ID is, for now, an allegation about where the money landed rather than a finding about who ran the scam.
The sequence is worth noting for its ordinary shape: a real device fault, a real search for help, a call that arrived within hours, a small payment that felt like routine paperwork, and a file sent through a messaging app. The ₹20 in payments was minor; the APK was what mattered, according to police.
What to watch next is whether investigators can trace the UPI recipient and follow the two transfers through the banking trail, and whether the case, involving a sitting judge, prompts wider warnings about fake customer-care apps.
Notable Quotes
The accused allegedly gained access to the victim's banking data after he installed the malicious APK file.— Tardeo Police (paraphrased)
Want the full story?
Read the original at Free Press Journal ↗
Crime & Justice