An investigation by Pakistan’s Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) has uncovered an alleged digital gambling network that processed around Rs119.93 billion through financial accounts linked to Easypaisa. The investigation points to the suspected involvement of company insiders who allegedly helped the network bypass security checks and use digital payment services to handle gambling transactions.

According to details reported in the case, the FIA registered a First Information Report (FIR) on September 24, 2026. The investigation suggests that the network used fake companies, misleading business websites, and multiple bank accounts to move funds connected to offshore gambling platforms.

The case has raised concerns about the misuse of digital financial services and the effectiveness of safeguards designed to prevent illegal transactions.

Easypaisa Accounts Allegedly Used to Process Gambling Payments

According to the investigation, the network allegedly established several corporate branchless banking accounts with Easypaisa between 2024 and 2025. Investigators suspect that certain company officials helped the accused open these accounts and avoid standard compliance procedures.

The accused allegedly registered the accounts under fake Single Member Companies (SMCs), presenting them as legitimate e-commerce and digital marketing businesses.

The investigation identifies Muhammad Zeeshan as a key accused in the case. During the enquiry, he reportedly told investigators that his associate, Viqar Rashid Khan, discussed the payment arrangements directly with Easypaisa officials.

Another accused, Muhammad Hamza Sarwar, allegedly created dummy websites to test payment integrations with Easypaisa. Investigators suspect that these websites helped the network connect its accounts to offshore gambling platforms while concealing the actual purpose of the transactions.

These allegations suggest that the network may have exploited legitimate payment infrastructure rather than relying on direct hacking. However, the allegations against the individuals involved remain subject to the legal process.

Alleged International Connections and Profit Sharing

The investigation also points to possible international links behind the operation. According to the reported FIR, Viqar Rashid Khan initially presented the payment arrangement on behalf of an alleged Chinese associate identified as Michael, who reportedly acted as an agent for online gaming and gambling platforms.

The group allegedly agreed on a profit-sharing arrangement under which Viqar would receive 25%, while Zeeshan and Michael would each receive 37.5%. The arrangement reportedly changed later, with Zeeshan and Viqar agreeing to divide the proceeds equally.

According to Zeeshan’s reported statement, he earned between Rs400 million and Rs450 million over approximately one year. Viqar allegedly received between Rs100 million and Rs150 million. The investigation also refers to an associate named Shahzaib, who reportedly delivered portions of the proceeds in cash.

These figures form part of the reported investigation and have not been established as final findings by a court.

Shell Companies Processed Billions of Rupees

Investigators allege that the network used several shell companies to collect and transfer money. Five branchless collection accounts reportedly processed approximately Rs8.586 billion through nearly 10.49 million transactions.

The FIR identifies 11 major Single Member Companies linked to the wider financial network. Four companies listed in the report recorded the following aggregate credit turnover:

According to the reported figures, Martnmarts SMC Pvt. Ltd., associated with Muhammad Zeeshan, recorded the highest turnover among these four companies. Teamsmart SMC Pvt. Ltd. and Housemart SMC Pvt. Ltd., both associated with Imran Ali, also recorded substantial transaction volumes.

These figures represent reported credit turnover. They should not be interpreted as confirmed personal profits or as the final amount of money proven to have originated from illegal gambling.

Funds Allegedly Moved Through Multiple Banks

The investigation describes a series of transfers intended to move money through different financial accounts and make its original source harder to trace.

According to the reported FIR, funds collected through Easypaisa-linked accounts moved into swap accounts at Mobilink Microfinance Bank Limited. The money then reportedly passed through accounts at Faysal Bank Limited and Dubai Islamic Bank.

The network allegedly transferred further amounts to unrelated sole proprietorships, including scrap dealers and mobile phone shops in areas such as Peshawar and Shahkas.

Investigators suspect that these transactions formed part of a broader money-laundering arrangement. The network allegedly used digital hawala channels and USDT, a cryptocurrency known as Tether, to settle portions of the funds.

The use of multiple companies, financial institutions, and cryptocurrency channels could make it more difficult for investigators to identify the original source and final destination of the money.

Case Raises Questions About Digital Payment Security

The alleged Rs119.93 billion network highlights the risks that digital payment providers face when criminals exploit business accounts and payment integration systems.

The reported involvement of company insiders is particularly significant because internal assistance, if proven, could undermine customer verification, business screening, and transaction monitoring procedures.

The case also follows earlier reports of large-scale gambling transactions involving digital wallets in Pakistan. The latest allegations place greater focus on how payment providers and financial institutions verify corporate customers and identify suspicious transaction patterns.

The FIA investigation will need to establish the roles of the accused, trace the movement of funds, and determine whether the accounts and companies knowingly supported illegal gambling operations.

For now, the reported findings remain allegations under investigation. Any criminal responsibility will depend on the evidence and the outcome of the legal proceedings.