Skip to main content
Loading page, please wait…
HomeCurrent AffairsEditorialsGovt SchemesLearning ResourcesUPSC SyllabusPricingAboutBest UPSC AIUPSC AI ToolAI for UPSCUPSC ChatGPT

© 2026 Vaidra. All rights reserved.

PrivacyTerms
Vaidra Logo
Vaidra

Top 4 items + smart groups

UPSC GPT
New
Current Affairs
Daily Solutions
Daily Puzzle
Mains Evaluator

Version 2.0.0 • Built with ❤️ for UPSC aspirants

ED Attaches ₹10.24 Cr in HPZ Token Scam; Uncovers Mule Accounts, Shell Firms and Payment Aggregator Abuse — UPSC Current Affairs | March 17, 2026
ED Attaches ₹10.24 Cr in HPZ Token Scam; Uncovers Mule Accounts, Shell Firms and Payment Aggregator Abuse
The Enforcement Directorate has provisionally attached ₹10.24 crore in 94 accounts linked to the HPZ Token investment scam, uncovering a network of mule accounts, shell companies and misuse of payment aggregators. The case highlights the challenges of regulating digital payments and money‑laundering, a key topic for UPSC aspirants in GS‑3 and GS‑2.
Overview The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has provisionally attached about ₹10.24 crore spread across 94 bank accounts linked to the HPZ Token scam. The investigation revealed a sophisticated network involving mule accounts , shell companies , and the misuse of payment aggregator services such as PayU, Aggrepay and Easebuzz. Key Developments ED attached ₹10.24 crore in 94 accounts as a provisional measure. Investigation traced fund flow from investors to the main accused, Bhupesh Arora , his father Gulshan Arora and associates. Initial collections were made through multiple UPI IDs linked to mule accounts at a private bank. Subsequent transfers were routed to various shell companies that misused payment aggregators for layering. A small portion of the money was cycled back to investors to create a false sense of legitimacy and attract fresh capital. Total proceeds of the alleged crime are estimated at ₹2,200 crore , with more than ₹662 crore already attached. Important Facts The scam leveraged digital payment infrastructure to move large sums quickly, exploiting the anonymity of mule accounts and the low‑friction nature of UPI . By channeling funds through shell companies and misrepresenting transactions on payment aggregators , the perpetrators attempted to ‘layer’ the Proceeds of Crime and make detection harder. UPSC Relevance This case illustrates the challenges of regulating digital finance, a topic frequently asked in GS‑3 (Economy) and GS‑2 (Polity) . Understanding the role of the ED , the mechanics of money‑laundering (placement, layering, integration), and the regulatory gaps in payment aggregators can help aspirants answer questions on financial crimes, cyber‑security, and the need for robust fintech governance. Way Forward Strengthen oversight of payment aggregators through mandatory KYC and transaction monitoring. Introduce real‑time tracking of large‑value transfers on UPI to flag suspicious patterns. Enhance inter‑agency coordination between the ED , the Financial Intelligence Unit and the Reserve Bank of India for quicker attachment of illicit assets. Promote public awareness about investment scams, emphasizing that unusually high returns often signal fraud.
  1. Home
  2. Prepare
  3. Current Affairs
  4. ED Attaches ₹10.24 Cr in HPZ Token Scam; Uncovers Mule Accounts, Shell Firms and Payment Aggregator Abuse
Login to bookmark articles
Login to mark articles as complete

Overview

ED’s ₹10.24 cr attachment exposes fintech loopholes, urging stricter regulator oversight

Key Facts

  1. ED provisionally attached ₹10.24 crore in 94 bank accounts linked to the HPZ Token scam (Mar 2026).
  2. Total proceeds of the HPZ Token fraud are estimated at ₹2,200 crore; ₹662 crore have already been attached.
  3. Primary accused are Bhupesh Arora and his father Gulshan Arora, who orchestrated the scheme.
  4. Funds were initially collected via UPI‑linked mule accounts at a private bank and later routed through shell companies using payment aggregators PayU, Aggrepay and Easebuzz.
  5. Money‑laundering stages observed: placement through UPI, layering via shell firms and aggregators, and integration by returning a small portion to investors to create a façade of legitimacy.
  6. Payment aggregators currently operate with limited KYC and transaction‑monitoring mandates under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
  7. ED functions under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and reports to the Ministry of Finance.

Background & Context

The case highlights how digital payment infrastructure can be weaponised for large‑scale money‑laundering, exposing regulatory gaps in fintech oversight. It underscores the ED’s role under PMLA in curbing financial crimes, a key focus in GS‑2 (Statutory bodies) and GS‑3 (Economy).

UPSC Syllabus Connections

GS2•Statutory, regulatory and quasi-judicial bodies

Mains Answer Angle

In a GS‑2 answer, discuss the need for a robust regulatory framework for payment aggregators and fintech platforms to prevent financial frauds, citing the HPZ Token scam as a contemporary example.

Full Article

Read Original on hindu

Analysis

Practice Questions

GS2
Easy
Prelims MCQ

Statutory bodies – Enforcement Directorate

1 marks
3 keywords
GS2
Medium
Mains Short Answer

Money‑laundering mechanisms

5 marks
6 keywords
GS2
Hard
Mains Essay

Regulation of fintech and payment aggregators

20 marks
7 keywords
Related:Daily•Weekly

Loading related articles...

Loading related articles...

Tip: Click articles above to read more from the same date, or use the back button to see all articles.

Explore:Current Affairs·Editorial Analysis·Govt Schemes·Study Materials·Previous Year Questions·UPSC GPT