Click the Play button to listen to article

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant today expressed a strong view over persons accused of digital arrest crimes. The Chief Justice said that if the law contains any scope, then such 'ruthless criminals', who target senior citizens and retired persons, must be punished before trial. 

"Given a chance, we will not allow an accused of a digital arrest to be released on bail by any court. You're talking of consolidation. Given a chance, we will set aside the bail order. If the law has any scope to really punish them before trial, that must also be adopted. The nature of crime they are committing - This is the newest crime being committed against senior citizens, retired people, who are being targeted by these ruthless criminals and they must be dealt with in the most ruthless manner. Extortion is the simplest. This is prima facie digital dacoity", CJI Kant commented while hearing a case involving allegations of digital arrest. 

The judge further remarked that on jurisdiction for investigation, the place where a victim was victimized is kept in mind by the court, not the one preferred by the accused. "We do not feel that your right of aggregation overrides the inconvenience of victims or the investigating agencies. Where does the convenience lie? Should we drag all the victims across the country to Delhi because you pray that you were a victim of some persuasion by the bigger stakeholders in this organized activity?", added Justice Joymalya Bagchi. 

A bench of CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice V Mohana was dealing with a case for consolidation of pan-India FIRs relating to alleged cyber offenses, including digital arrest. The bench expressed that the petitioner could approach the Delhi High Court for aggregation of all Delhi cases, as he claimed they were being investigated by Mandir Marg Police station. 

The petitioner claimed that the allegations qua him pertained to Rs. 80 lakhs in one account and Rs.1.2 crores in another. He argued that chargesheet had already been filed and the same offense was being investigated by two different agencies. He also averred that his account was used as a mule account and he was not aware of the same. As such, he was also a victim and had infact lodged a complaint. 

In response, Justice Bagchi commented that the petitioner's company was facing bad times and he allowed its accounts to be used for receiving proceeds of digital arrest crimes. The petitioner defended that as soon as he came to know that the account was being used as a mule account, a complaint was filed with cyber crime authorities. However the bench was not convinced. 

Ultimately, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn. 

It may be recalled that in October 2025, a CJI Kant-led bench took suo motu cognizance of rising cases of “digital arrest” scams, where fraudsters impersonate law enforcement agencies or judicial authorities to extort money from citizens, particularly senior citizens. The step followed the complaint of a 73-year-old woman from Ambala, who alleged that fraudsters used forged Supreme Court documents to extort money from her. 

In April this year, the CJI expressed dismay that even well-educated people were falling prey to digital arrest scams. The judge recounted the case of a woman who apparently lost her entire post-retirement savings to a digital arrest scam.

In August, the Court asked the RBI to formalize a standard operating procedure for banks, including temporary debit holds on accounts linked to cyber fraud, grievance redressal and mechanisms to restore defrauded money. 

Tags: