The Canadian education scam perpetrated by notorious educational consultants/agents recently came to light, leaving approximately 700 students in a precarious situation, facing the possibility of deportation from Canada.
These unscrupulous agencies, which claim to facilitate a smooth transition for students seeking to study abroad, have exploited unsuspecting individuals by providing false information and unauthorised services.
As the number of such agencies continues to grow, it becomes evident that immediate action is required to protect the futures of thousands of aspiring students.
“The standard working of these agencies/educational consultants is such that they have tie ups with the universities abroad and provide all information about the entry requirements,” advocate Anant Malik said.
It is important to exercise caution and conduct a thorough research before engaging with these agencies.
Malik said: “Various such agencies, the agents of which are more often than not unqualified/hoodwinking cons, are mushrooming.
“It is also absolutely essential that the aspiring individuals who plan to go abroad via such agencies exercise precaution before incurring any loss. This is where the Latin legal term ‘Caveat Emptor’ comes in. It translates to ‘buyer beware’ and implies due diligence on part of the consumer/receiver to exercise caution before entering into any contractual relationship.”
While the Canadian government has temporarily halted deportations and initiated investigations, affected students now face the challenge of proving their innocence and lack of knowledge regarding the fraud committed by these consultants.
Each student facing deportation is now supposed to present evidence indicating that he/she was actually a victim of the fraud and had no knowledge or “mens rea”.
“The Canadian law, like the Indian legal system, functions on the concept of mens rea, which means intention to commit an offence. Without intention, the ingredients of any offence are not made out and one cannot be held liable who had no knowledge/intention,” Malik explained.
Nevertheless, the Indian government has taken steps to address the issue, as Union External Affairs Minister has stepped in and a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by Ludhiana Range IG Kaustabh Sharma has been set up.
“In addition to government’s intervention, it is essential to introduce stringent provisions and regulations to curb economic offences of this nature,” Malik said.
On the legal remedies available to students under Indian law, advocate Shashank Dewan said, “The legal remedies available to students under Indian law include both civil and criminal cases where the students or their families can file cases for cheating, forgery, and suit for recovery and a suit for damages against the unscrupulous education consultants and their business.”
“However, the same might be regarded as an admission of guilt under Canadian laws and can be used against the students in deportation proceedings,” he added.
The current circumstance should serve as a model for establishing a system that governs education consultants and their activities, aiming to prevent students from encountering unfavourable and risky situations that could negatively impact their lives and future prospects.
“It is crucial for Indian students who have become victims of unethical and cruel educational consultants to be aware of the legal options available to them. These remedies encompass both civil and criminal liabilities,” Dewan said.
“The students can hold these agencies accountable under different Sections of Indian Penal Code 1860 for committing offences of “Cheating (Section 420), Forgery for the purpose of Cheating (Section 468), Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender is bound to protect (Section 418),” Malik told.
Moreover, offences of Forgery of Valuable Security, Will, etc (Section 467), Criminal Breach of Trust by an Agent (Section 409), Counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents other than those described in Section 467 or possessing counterfeit marked material (Section 476) as well as under Section 66A (b) and (c) and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, are also applicable.
“It is essential for students to pursue civil remedies to recover their money and seek compensation for the damages caused by such consultants,” Dewan said.
Furthermore, the Ministry of Education should establish a licensing system to authorise consultancy firms and ensuring proper documentation of agents’ educational qualifications.
By exploring both civil and criminal legal remedies, victims of unethical education consultants can seek justice, recover their losses, and prevent such incidents from recurring in the future.
20230618-120205
