SC Mulls CBI Probe Into ‘Digital Arrest’ Scams
The top court noted the submissions of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, that cyber crime and digital arrest cases are originating from off-shore locations like Myanmar and Thailand and directed the probe agency to come up with a plan to probe these cases
NEW DELHI: Taking note of the magnitude and nationwide spread of digital arrest cases, the Supreme Court on Monday sought details of FIRs registered across different States and Union Territories and said it is inclined to entrust the investigation of such cases to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
A two-judge Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notices to all States and Union Territories regarding digital arrest cases and listed for hearing the suo motu case registered by the court based on a complaint from an elderly woman defrauded by cybercriminals on November 3.
The apex court recorded the submission of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, who informed the Bench that many cybercrime and digital arrest cases originate from offshore locations such as Myanmar and Thailand. The court directed the CBI to prepare and present a plan to investigate these cases.
“We will monitor the progress of the CBI investigation and issue whatever directions are necessary,” the Bench observed.
The court also asked the CBI to indicate whether it requires additional resources, including independent cyber experts from outside the police force, to effectively probe digital arrest cases.
On October 17, while taking note of the alarming rise in online frauds, particularly digital arrests used to extort money through fabricated judicial or investigative orders, the Supreme Court had sought responses from the Centre and the CBI, observing that such offences strike at “the very foundation of public trust in the system.”
The court had earlier taken suo motu cognisance of a shocking case involving the digital arrest of a senior citizen couple in Ambala, Haryana, based on forged court and agency orders by fraudsters who extorted ₹1.05 crore from them.
The Bench noted that this was not an ordinary crime where routine police action would suffice, but a matter requiring coordinated efforts between Central and State police agencies to uncover the full extent of the criminal network.