Paddy Merchant Cheats 40 Farmers in Yadgir District, Flees with Rs 1.93 Crore
In a distressing incident from Hunasigi taluk, Yadgir district, a paddy merchant has allegedly cheated around 40 farmers from Baichbal, Karadkal, and Kudalagi villages by purchasing 12,921 packets of paddy and absconding without paying them. The total value of the paddy is estimated at over Rs 1.93 crore, leaving the farmers in severe financial hardship.
Details of the Fraud
According to reports, the merchant, identified as Shrinivasreddy, bought the paddy from the farmers a couple of months ago, assuring them that he would make the payment within 15 days. However, for the past two months, he has been missing, with farmers unable to locate him despite searching in multiple places. The paddy was loaded into 35 lorries, and Shrinivasreddy had set a slightly higher price this year, which initially seemed favorable to the farmers.
One farmer, Mallanna Bilebavi of Baichabal village, revealed that Shrinivasreddy used to reside in Kannalli camp near their village. He had a history of buying paddy from these farmers annually and making timely payments, which built trust over 5 to 6 years. This year, however, he exploited that trust, purchasing the produce and then disappearing without settling the dues.
Impact on Farmers
The farmers are now deeply worried about their livelihoods, as they invested significant money in cultivating the paddy. They expressed concerns about falling into debt traps, having lost their earnings over the past year. The incident has highlighted vulnerabilities in the agricultural supply chain, where reliance on trusted brokers can lead to such frauds.
Legal Action and Investigation
In response, the farmers filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Shrinivasreddy on February 2. Additionally, they met with Additional SP Dharaneesh in Yadagiri town on Saturday to submit a formal complaint. The Kemmbhavi police have registered a case and are actively investigating the matter to trace the absconding merchant and recover the dues.
This case underscores the need for stronger safeguards in agricultural transactions to protect farmers from such financial exploitation.
