Harshad Mehta used fake bank receipts to divert bank money into shares
Harshad Mehta (1992 securities scam) · Stockbroking
The case in brief
Visible before detection
Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight
Document authenticity / direct pull
Would have checked bank receipts against the issuing bank.
Can mislead when: The company can refuse consent, and a refusal is itself a flag. Some banks and co-op banks are not on AA yet.
Bank credits vs books
Would have matched government securities to holdings.
Can mislead when: AA only sees the accounts the company links, so an undisclosed account stays invisible. Cash-heavy businesses and timing differences create false flags.
End-use tracing of funds
Would have traced bank money to stock purchases.
Can mislead when: Kubr sees only the company's own accounts. Once money reaches a third party's bank, Kubr can flag the payee but cannot see the next hop without that party's consent.
Where Kubr services would have helped
Financial diligence
Offered in India- C1 Would have matched government securities to holdings.
- C5 Would have checked bank receipts against the issuing bank.
Borrower monitor
Offered in India- C1 Would have matched government securities to holdings.
- C6 Would have traced bank money to stock purchases.
Proceeds tracer
Offered in India- C1 Would have matched government securities to holdings.
- C6 Would have traced bank money to stock purchases.
Model check
Offered in India- C1 Would have matched government securities to holdings.
Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.
Same pattern
A summary of public documents. It reports what the sources say. It is not Kubr's finding and not a statement of guilt.