Mumbai: Logistics Firm Accuses ALX Shipping of Rs 18.33 Cr Fraud – Police File Cheating FIR

The Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Mumbai police has formally registered a cheating case against ALX Shipping Agencies and its Dubai‑based partner Aladdin Express, charging the duo with a Rs 18.33 crore fraud. The allegations center on a series of investment agreements signed with Vijay Mehta, the director of Rushabh Sealink & Logistics Pvt. Ltd., who claims the shipping firms lured him into multiple contracts with promises of high returns that were never honoured.

Background & Context

India’s logistics sector, worth over ₹13 trillion in 2023, sees Mumbai as the keystone of its maritime trade network. The city’s bustling ports and steadily growing e‑commerce footprint amplify the stakes for investors and SMEs alike. Yet, the sector has not been immune to the scourge of corporate fraud. Recent accounts of malfeasance—ranging from fictitious consignment bills to false invoicing—have shaken client confidence and prompted tighter regulatory scrutiny.

In the present case, the seed of the alleged deceit was planted in late April 2025 when Mr. Mehta, a 45‑year‑old businessman with a 15‑year track record in logistics, approached ALX Shipping Agencies. He cited the company’s reputation, backed by the parent firm All Cargo Shipping, and the added credibility of Aladdin Express—a Dubai‑registered entity reputed for its expansive freight network.

Given the expanding cross‑border trade during post‑COVID normalization, there is a worldwide surge in venture capital inflows and joint ventures. For young professionals and students navigating logistics and supply‑chain courses, Mumbai shipping fraud cases like this serve as stark reminders of the risks inherent in rapid scaling of trade partnerships.

Key Developments

• FIR Registration – On 2 December 2025, the EOW logged a cheating FIR that lists Sandeep Bakshi (CEO of ALX Shipping Agencies India Pvt. Ltd.), Vikas Khan, and Ali Khan (both directors of Aladdin Express DMCC) as the primary accused parties. The complaint also names the two companies themselves.
• Investments & Promises – Mr. Mehta invested Rs 10 crore into an initiative called OEL Express India Pvt. Ltd., with the understanding of a “fixed profit” on every business cycle. While the first tranche was returned, subsequent disbursements stalled, with only Rs 1.5 crore returned from a second Rs 10 crore input. A further Rs 10 crore was deposited into ALX Shipping on Mr. Bakshi’s recommendation, with an expected return of Rs 12.10 crore within two months—a cash flow that never materialised.
• Vessel Money Claims – The plaintiff also claims that Rs 7.61 crore (US$ 8.75 000) was sent to cover fuel and freight dues for ships “Leela Mombasa” and “Xinjinhai‑2,” supposedly to mitigate perishable cargo losses. According to Mehta, this payment was never utilized and promised US$ 1.08 crore as profit against a subsequent voyage remains unpaid.
• Operational Losses – The case further outlines an Rs 88 lakh loss stemming from an abrupt withdrawal of a release order for 302 containers, forcing a shift to a different vessel at higher leasing costs.
• Defence Statements – ALX’s CEO Sandeep Bakshi responded to the Times of India, stating that all payments had been received in the company’s bank account and remitted to a Dubai-based account. He insists he was merely following directives from the directors, and that no amount had been diverted to his personal accounts.

“I have been made a scapegoat,” Bakshi told reporters. “All relevant emails and approvals from the shareholders or directors of ALX India agency and ALX DMCC Dubai have been submitted to the EOW.” The plaintiff’s petition includes extensive documentation—email chains, signed agreements, and bank statements—to substantiate the financial trail she believes was deliberately obfuscated.

Impact Analysis

For the high‑stakes world of maritime trade, the case highlights several urgent ramifications:

• Investor Confidence – A Rs 18.33 crore fraud among prominent logistics players erodes trust, especially among smaller venture-backed firms that often rely on syndication and offshore partners.
• Regulatory Response – The Mumbai Economic Offences Wing is now scrutinising cross‑border financial flows more closely, possibly leading to stricter due‑diligence protocols for foreign‑linked logistics entities.
• Student & Professional Preparedness – Those studying logistics, supply‑chain management, and commerce must now factor in legal due‑diligence modules and fraud prevention practices in their curricula and internships.
• Insurance & Litigation Costs – Firms may face increased insurance premiums for coverage against insolvency and fraud, with litigation costs stretching into the multiple‑crore range over extended settlement periods.

From an international education perspective, students aiming for Indian maritime programs should recognise that real‑world case studies like Mumbai shipping fraud increasingly inform risk‑assessment frameworks at universities and professional bodies alike.

Expert Insights & Practical Tips

Conduct Rigorous Due Diligence – Before committing any capital, businesses should verify the legal standing of foreign partners, secure board approvals, and ensure clear contractual clauses covering profit distribution and refund mechanisms.

Opt for Escrow Arrangements – For large cross‑border commitments, placing funds in an escrow account held by a neutral third party can safeguard against unilateral withholding of payments.

Maintain Transparent Accounting – Keep exhaustive records of all transactional emails, signed agreements, and financial reconciliations. Digital twins of such data can indeed serve as evidence in potential arbitration or litigation.

Engage Legal Counsel Early – Retaining experts specialized in maritime law and international commercial contracts can preempt ambiguous clauses that might be exploited for fraud.

Leverage Academic Networks – Diplomatic outreach between universities and industry associations can promote knowledge sharing on fraud detection, especially for students involved in internships with foreign‑based logistics firms.

Looking Ahead

While the investigation is ongoing, several scenarios may unfold. Should the Mumbai EOW secure irrefutable evidence of misappropriation, the complainant may file a civil suit seeking restitution of the remaining Rs 8.75 crore. The court could also mandate asset freezes on the implicated entities. Moreover, the case could trigger policy reviews at the Ministry of Ports, Shipping & Inland Water Transport, mandating higher transparency for foreign‑linked shipping companies operating in Indian waters.

On the international front, regulators in Dubai and other major trade hubs might tighten downstream banking infrastructure controls to prevent cross‑border money laundering that masquerades as legitimate freight operations. This would compel logistics firms to adopt more stringent anti‑money‑laundering (AML) compliance frameworks, dovetailing with global standards set by the World Bank and the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

For the academic community, the case will likely be incorporated into case‑study modules on supply‑chain integrity and corporate governance. It also signals the necessity for updated risk‑analysis curricula that can prepare students for the evolving regulatory environment in one of the world’s most dynamic port cities.

Ultimately, the unfolding Mumbai shipping fraud saga underscores a broader truth: confidence in trade infrastructure is only as strong as the safeguards woven into every contract, every transaction, and every ship’s manifest.

Reach out to us for personalized consultation based on your specific requirements.