Top 3 Corporate Fraud Cases Handled by Crimeophobia: Times of India Framing, Byju’s Dubai Escape, and Chhota Rajan’s Real Estate—Exposing the Underworld, Overworld, and Bureaucratic Nexus

Mumbai | Special Report — As corporate fraud cases escalate across India’s economic capital, the Crimeophobia Team brings to light three of the most astonishing and uniquely complicated fraud cases it has handled over the years. These cases cut across Mumbai’s Media, Real Estate, Sports, and Education sectors, and involve both underworld and overworld networks, with an unsettling overlap of police complicity and bureaucratic loopholes. While each case involves clear physical documentation, the accused, surprisingly, managed to avoid immediate legal consequences — a reality the Crimeophobia Team continues to challenge, in which Criminologist Snehil Dhall has also been appearing as either Intervenor or Subject Expert for arguing at the Indian Courts, Mumbai Police, and Government Departments.

Case 1: Ghost Complainant in FIR, Oral Evidence for Financial Fraud, and Conspiracy framing the Times of India top management

The first case revolves around Mahesh Ranka, a sports industry entrepreneur having his company called GamechangerZ who previously held senior roles as General Manager at IMG Reliance, Relay Worldwide, and other major firms. Allegedly, Ranka orchestrated a plan to frame senior management officials from The Times of India Group in a financial fraud case, solely based on oral evidence. To protect his one false statement as complainant in the FIR during 2004, he masterminded a snowball effect of multiple other fake cases through others so that no one investigates his criminal conspiracy.

After multiple investigations and arguments as Intervenor headed by Criminologist Snehil Dhall, the trial began, and in the year 2025, in a sworn court statement, Ranka revealed that he relied on oral testimony from a government official to claim a fraud of ₹8 crores. However, as per reports of the Crimeophobia Team, the same official — who registered a complaint (FIR) days later — cited only ₹2.4 crores in losses, again without providing any financial reports or documentation. The twist deepened when this supposed government employee went on to accuse members of the Times Group’s senior management, including a family member of the then Managing Director, who were part of the Managing Committee of a Mumbai-based residential Cooperative Housing Society. The Trial for this case is about to begin with only two out of eleven accused since all of the others are listed as ‘WANTED’ including Times Group Ex-Managing Director’s family member.

Whereas, in an unprecedented move, how did Mumbai Police registered both the FIRs purely on oral evidence — an irregularity in financial fraud cases is still unknown. Even more shocking, when Crimeophobia investigated, every single government department denied employing the individual who filed the complaint by impersonating as Government official. The Crimeophobia Team uncovered several handwritten confessions on Government Letterheads with official signatures & stamps confirming that the complainant was neither employed nor authorized by any government body to initiate such legal proceedings of financial fraud. Upon the Court’s order based on Crimeophobia’s investigations, the complainant (government official) was summoned, and Mumbai Police submitted a Death Certificate, which further backed the criminal conspiracy identified by the Crimeophobia Team of a ‘Ghost Complainant’. The death certificate can also not be confirmed if it linked to the same complainant’s name.

The mystery surrounding this “ghost complainant” raises grave concerns: Who impersonated a Maharashtra government official and managed to lodge an FIR with Mumbai Police? Was the impersonation backed or facilitated by Mahesh Ranka himself? The case remains sub judice, but its implications continue to ripple through the corridors of media and law enforcement, since one criminal conspirator named Mahesh Ranka managed not just to frame top management of the Times of India but also fooled the Mumbai Police with misleading information and created more than 100 court cases and FIRs in the same cooperative housing society. The game played by this sport entrepreneur continues to remain untouched by Mumbai Police for FIR by stating Counter-FIR cannot be filed against him at the moment since the matter is sub judice.

Case 2: Chhota Rajan’s Property Deal and the Oracle (US) Connection

The second case, again linked to Mumbai’s properties and housing societies, exposes the entanglement between Mumbai’s underworld and public institutions. Mumbai’s Stamp Duty Registration Department accepted a declaration/affidavit from the family of mafia don Chhota Rajan, who is in Indian prison after extradition, enabling the sale of a property to an unsuspecting family.

The property in question was once part of a CBI-allotted government bungalow (as alleged) turned into a cooperative housing society before its sale. No valid chain-of-ownership documents existed to prove that the property had been lawfully acquired before it was sold. Yet, the sale proceeded, with a Customs & Excise Department employee acting as a witness, and the mafia’s family opting for a declaration to sell their property to a salaried, simple Indian family with banking industry background.

The property documents are now involved in a legal dispute after the buyer, a banker, couldn’t prepare her ‘Will’ appropriately, and her daughters now fight for the same property ownership. One of the daughters, who holds a top managerial position at Oracle Corporation in the United States, is also now an American citizen. The case took another shocking turn when it was discovered that the Oracle-employed daughter had used the same mafia-linked address to renew her Indian passport in 1991, three years before her family officially purchased the property in 1994. In addition, the husband of this daughter boosted his connections by claiming to be the real nephew of financial sector tycoon Motilal Oswal, to which the Crimeophobia Team approached him for clarification, and he officially denied any connection with the man and stated that he was not his uncle (Mama) whatsoever.

Surprisingly, the landowner of the CBI-allotted plot also has links with a major political family legacy, who are also party to various land disputes. This timeline discrepancy poses uncomfortable questions: Did she reside at a mafia-owned address before becoming a U.S. citizen? And if so, why did Mumbai Police approve her passport application using that address? Moreover, can a dreaded criminal or gangster use an affidavit or declaration for proving their honesty in order to sell their property? Shouldn’t the chain-of-ownership documents have been established before government authorities dealing with the housing society verified the authenticity?

Case 3: Byju Raveendran, Dubai Links, and Mumbai Police’s Civil Cover-Up

The third and most recent case highlights the only FIR ever registered against Byju Raveendran, founder of the embattled EdTech firm BYJU’S. Filed by Crimeophobia, the case was groundbreaking — not just because of the accused, but because of how it was handled.

Byju’s manager and lawyer submitted a police statement on his behalf, naming him as the accused despite his absence. The FIR marked a global legal milestone against Byju, who has since relocated to Dubai, a region historically linked to post-riot mafia migration from Mumbai following the 1991–1993 bomb blasts. Even though the FIR was controversially closed using statements from intermediaries, the Sessions Court has now initiated ex parte proceedings. Byju has not appeared before either the Mumbai Police or the court since the FIR’s registration. Legal experts now question why Mumbai Police treated a criminal FIR as if it were a civil case, effectively bypassing criminal prosecution procedures. The answer remains elusive, while Byju Raveendran continues to remain unprosecuted for the allegations levelled in the FIR.

The FIR was duly registered with Mumbai Police due to a false statement being published by the accused, Mr. Byju Raveendran, on his company website BYJU’S as part of the UPSC curriculum. The statement incorrectly claimed that “The nodal agency for all dealings with UNTOC is the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI),” whereas the UNTOC is under implementation proceedings at the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, duly filed by Criminologist Snehil Dhall. The UNTOC (United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime) in India covers crimes including human trafficking (women & children), arms smuggling, and money laundering. After Crimeophobia’s FIR against Byju, the irony surfaced that Byju Raveendran himself had carried out major money laundering and now faces litigation in India and the U.S., while he operates from Dubai — just like Mumbai’s underworld.

He has also been accused of compromising children’s data and safety by various other complainants, who were encouraged to file cases after Crimeophobia’s proceedings against BYJU’S. Nevertheless, pertaining to Crimeophobia’s case against Byju Raveendran as the accused in the FIR, the background of UNTOC also highlights the statement is false, also because the CBI provided written confirmation to the complainant, Criminologist Snehil Dhall, that the UNTOC “does not pertain to them.” More than 500 pages of documents were submitted as evidence that the CBI is not the nodal agency for implementing UNTOC.

Based on this, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed an “ISSUE RULE” order in 2020 after admitting the Criminal Writ Petition filed by Dhall. Despite the extensive evidence and witness list, the Police submitted a B-Summary Report, and the Magistrate Court rejected the Protest Petition, wrongly stating that the CBI letter did not confirm if it referred to UNTOC. Sensitive and confidential documents from the Government of India were already submitted in previous applications, proving that the CBI’s letter specifically referred to UNTOC. These documents are part of the current Revision Petition for the Court’s ready reference.

These three high-stakes cases reveal not only the deep-rooted nexus between Mumbai’s underworld, overworld, and official institutions, but also underscore systemic failures in law enforcement and governance. With impersonation, forged documentation, and unexplained police decisions forming the common thread, these cases serve as a stark reminder of the blurred lines between crime, business, and bureaucracy. As the Crimeophobia Team continues its pursuit of justice through legal avenues, these cases remain a chilling testament to the complexity and audacity of financial fraud in one of India’s most influential cities.