Tue Jan 07 11:26:59 UTC 2025: ## Mumbai Jewellery Chain Accused of Multi-Crore Rupee Ponzi Scheme

**Mumbai, January 7, 2025** – Hundreds of investors are demanding their money back from Torres Jewellery, a Mumbai-based chain, after it allegedly orchestrated a massive Ponzi scheme promising exorbitant returns. The company, with six stores across the city, has blamed its CEO and other staff members for the fraud, claiming a “coup” and robbery resulted in the loss of funds.

Investors, many from lower-middle class backgrounds, invested amounts ranging from thousands to crores of rupees, lured by promises of up to 25% monthly returns and attractive bonus schemes. The scheme, operating since February 2024, involved the sale of gemstone jewellery – later revealed to be fake – alongside investment plans offering initially 6%, and later 11%, interest. While some payouts were initially made, payments ceased around two months ago.

The situation escalated after Torres released a YouTube video last week, offering an 11% interest rate on investments made before January 5th, incentivizing cash payments with an additional 0.5% interest, effectively drawing a final influx of investment before closing their stores on January 6th.

Police have registered a case against Platinum Hern Private Limited, the holding company, its two directors, CEO Tausif Reyaz, general manager, and a store in-charge. Charges include cheating and criminal conspiracy. Seven investors, who collectively claim losses exceeding ₹13 crore, have filed the complaint.

Torres, in a separate YouTube video, alleges that Reyaz and Chief Analyst Abhishek Gupta staged a coup, robbing company stores and vandalizing property. The company claims to have provided CCTV footage to police as evidence.

Investors are expressing outrage, with some vowing to remain at Torres’ Dadar store until their money is returned. They question the government’s role, citing the company’s possession of a GST and CIN number, suggesting a degree of official recognition. The incident highlights the vulnerability of low-income individuals to such schemes and raises questions about regulatory oversight.

Read More