Judgment Intelligence
OtherSuo Motu: In Re Tackling the Issue of Digital Arrest Scams v. Union of India & Ors.
Civil Writ Petition No. 1311/2025 (Suo Motu PIL)
- Court
- Rajasthan High Court
- Date of Decision
- 22 January 2025
- Bench
- Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 35, 36 and 63); Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021
Final Outcome
Cognizance taken, notice issued and reports called for (paras 29-33). After the State filed an affidavit on the steps taken, a Division Bench closed the petition on 31.07.2025 (2025:RJ-JP:29205-DB), "In view of assurance given by Advocate General and steps are already taken".
Key holdings
- Suo motu petition registered against seven respondents: the Union, the National Cyber Forensic Laboratory, the RBI, the NPCI, the Chief Secretary, the DGP and the ADG (Cyber Crime); notice returnable in three weeks (paras 29-30).
- The Chief Secretary of Rajasthan and the Union Home Secretary must report the steps taken by the State and Central Governments to curb digital arrest and cyber crime (para 31).
- The Additional Solicitor General, the Advocate General and an advocate were requested to assist; the matter went to the Chief Justice for listing (paras 32-33).
- The public-awareness campaign and the RBI payment-stoppage mechanism were described as steps ‘required’; the order issued no direction on them (paras 26-28).
Brief Facts
The Court noted media reports that thousands of people had lost their savings, and some their lives, to ‘digital arrest’ scams, in which fraudsters pose as police, Enforcement Directorate or CBI officers, accuse victims of serious crimes and keep them on camera until they pay (paras 1-4, 8). It recorded NCRB figures for 2022 of about 65,893 cyber crime cases nationally and about 1,833 in Rajasthan (para 11). It surveyed foreign responses (para 10) and the steps already taken: the I4C, the 1930 helpline, cyber forensic laboratories, the DoT's Chakshu facility and spoofed-call blocking, and Rajasthan's Operation Anti-Virus (paras 13-22).
Court's Findings
The Court found that ‘digital arrest’ has no legal standing in India and is a scam that can snare even well-educated people (para 6). Fraudsters use fear, urgency and false authority, and sometimes artificial intelligence to mimic the voices of victims' relatives (paras 3, 5). Awareness and education are crucial to recognise such attacks (para 9). Although several steps had been taken at various levels of Government, more serious steps were required from all stakeholders (para 24). The Court said it had been found that data sold by some social media companies is misused by those committing such crimes (para 25). It called for a public campaign through print, electronic and social media, television and FM radio, every hour and every day, telling people that a call claiming an arrest by video is a scam (para 26). Under the BNSS, an electronic summons must be encrypted and bear the Court's seal and digital signature, and an arrest requires clear identification of the officer and an arrest memo attested by a witness (para 26). The RBI and the Government needed a mechanism to stop payments to fraudsters once a victim complains (paras 27-28).
Legal Principle
Indian law knows no ‘digital arrest’. An arrest must follow the due process of Sections 35 and 36 of the BNSS, with clear identification and an attested arrest memo, and an electronic summons under Section 63 must be encrypted and carry the Court's seal and digital signature. A video-call ‘arrest’ is a scam (paras 6, 26).
