Identity Theft And Financial Fraud
1. What Is Identity Theft?
Identity theft occurs when a person illegally obtains and uses another individual's personal information—such as name, Social Security number, Aadhaar number, bank details, credit card numbers—without authorization, typically for financial gain.
Common techniques:
Phishing emails or fake websites
SIM swap scams
Skimming of debit/credit cards
Data breaches
Social engineering
Account takeover (email, bank, or social media)
2. What Is Financial Fraud?
Financial fraud refers to deception with the intent to gain financial benefit using forged documents, stolen identity, false representation, or manipulation of financial instruments.
Examples:
Credit card fraud
Online banking fraud
Wire transfer fraud
Loan fraud using fake identity
Investment scams
Insurance fraud
Identity theft is often the first step in committing financial fraud.
3. Key Elements (Legally)
To establish identity theft or financial fraud, courts generally look at:
Unauthorized acquisition of personal or financial information
Intent to commit fraud or deception
Use of stolen identity for economic benefit
Actual loss or potential risk of harm
DETAILED CASE LAWS (MORE THAN FIVE)
Below are seven well-known cases explained in detail.
CASE 1: United States v. David O. Smith (U.S.)
Facts
David Smith ran a large-scale phishing scheme. He sent fake emails impersonating popular banks, directing users to fraudulent websites. Victims unknowingly provided login credentials, which Smith used to transfer funds from their accounts.
Issues
Whether phishing constituted wire fraud and identity theft
Whether online impersonation met statutory “use of identifying information”
Court’s Findings
Phishing emails used electronic communication, fulfilling the Wire Fraud Statute (18 U.S.C. § 1343)
Stolen login credentials were considered "means of identification"
Smith knowingly used identities to obtain financial gain → Aggravated Identity Theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A)
Outcome
Smith was sentenced to over 12 years in prison, marking one of the earliest severe penalties for phishing-based identity theft.
CASE 2: R v. Ovie Onakoya (U.K.)
Facts
Onakoya was involved in a cyber-fraud ring that hacked into email accounts and used the identities of individuals to divert business payments. He laundered more than £1 million.
Issues
Whether unauthorized access to email accounts constituted identity theft
Whether business email compromise (BEC) amounted to fraud by false representation
Court’s Findings
Unauthorized access clearly violated Computer Misuse Act 1990
Using hijacked email accounts to mislead companies satisfied Fraud Act 2006 – Fraud by False Representation
Identity theft was central to committing financial fraud
Outcome
Onakoya received a 6-year sentence. The case emphasized international cooperation in cyber-fraud.
CASE 3: United States v. Hushpuppi (Ramon Abbas) (U.S.)
Facts
Ramon Abbas (“Hushpuppi”), a social media influencer, was part of a global cyber-fraud network. They used identity theft, fake business emails, and hacked systems to steal over $24 million, including attempts to steal $100 million from a Premier League football club.
Issues
Whether impersonating a company executive in email constituted identity theft
Whether financial losses must actually occur to prove conspiracy
Court’s Findings
Using spoofed email identities counted as identity theft
Conspiracy to commit wire fraud requires intent, even if fraud is interrupted
Large-scale international fraud increases sentencing levels
Outcome
Abbas was sentenced to 11 years and ordered to pay restitution. This case highlighted the sophistication of identity-based cybercrime.
CASE 4: State of Maharashtra v. Nilesh Jain (India)
Facts
Nilesh Jain cloned ATM cards using skimming devices installed on ATM machines in Mumbai. He used cardholder identities and PINs to withdraw lakhs of rupees.
Issues
Whether cloned ATM cards count as stolen “identity information”
Whether the Information Technology Act applies to card-skimming
Court’s Findings
Skimming violated Section 66C (Identity Theft) of the IT Act, 2000
Cloned cards constituted fraudulent electronic records under Section 468 IPC
Unauthorized withdrawal was cheating and financial fraud
Outcome
He was convicted under both IPC and IT Act sections. The court stressed the seriousness of electronic identity theft.
*CASE 5: CBI v. Amit Kumar & Others – The Vyapam Scam (India)
(Identity theft used for examination & job fraud, which later led to financial fraud)
Facts
Impersonators appeared in examinations on behalf of students. False identities were created using forged documents. Successful candidates later gained government jobs, causing financial losses to the state.
Issues
Whether impersonation constitutes identity theft
Whether obtaining employment by impersonation amounts to financial fraud
Court’s Findings
Impersonation constituted identity theft, cheating, and forgery
Fraudulent appointment led to financial gain (salary, benefits) → financial fraud
The organized criminal aspect aggravated charges
Outcome
Multiple individuals were convicted, and the court emphasized the connection between identity theft and financial corruption.
CASE 6: United States v. Evan Greebel (U.S.)
Facts
Attorney Evan Greebel conspired with Martin Shkreli (pharmaceutical executive) to use the identities of company shareholders without authorization to manipulate stock and hide losses.
Issues
Whether using another’s financial identity without permission constitutes identity theft
Whether identity misuse in corporate fraud counts as aggravated identity theft
Court’s Findings
Fraudulently signing documents and acting on behalf of shareholders constituted identity theft
Financial deception using these identities amounted to securities fraud
Outcome
Greebel received a lengthy sentence and restitution orders. This case expanded identity theft into the realm of corporate fraud.
CASE 7: R v. Adeyinka Adelekan (U.K.)
Facts
Adelekan used stolen credit card details from hacked databases to make luxury purchases and fund online transactions.
Issues
Whether possession of stolen digital card data constitutes identity theft
Whether misuse of card numbers is sufficient evidence
Court’s Findings
Digital possession of card numbers = identity theft under U.K. law
Use of stolen card details is fraud by false representation
Even attempted transactions count as fraud
Outcome
Adelekan was convicted, reinforcing that identity theft includes purely digital information, not just physical cards.
CONCLUSION
Identity theft is the unauthorized acquisition and misuse of personal information, and it frequently leads to financial fraud. Courts across jurisdictions treat identity theft as a serious offense, especially when committed through digital means. These cases demonstrate:
How identity theft evolves with technology
How courts adapt traditional fraud laws to digital crimes
That identity theft can be part of cybercrime, corporate fraud, ATM fraud, impersonation scams, and more
RELATED Blog
0 comments