The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday sought responses from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), telecom service providers, the Union Ministry of Communications, and private banks operating in the state in connection with a growing menace of ‘digital arrest’ frauds.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice G Narendra and Justice Subhash Upadhyay converted a petition filed by Haridwar resident Surendra Kumar into a public interest litigation (PIL) and directed the respondents to file their replies within three weeks. The next hearing has been scheduled thereafter.
The bench ordered that the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) prepared for curbing cybercrime be circulated to all police stations across Uttarakhand. It further directed that public awareness campaigns be organised to protect citizens from falling prey to fraudulent calls and messages.
During the hearing, Inspector General (Law and Order) Nilesh Anand Bharne and Senior Superintendent of Police (Cyber Crime) Navneet Bhullar, appearing via video conferencing, informed the court that the state police had already issued an SOP for preventing cybercrime. The court stressed that these measures must reach the grassroots level for effective implementation.
In his plea, Kumar narrated that he had received phone calls from two different numbers about a month ago. The callers falsely claimed that a non-bailable warrant had been issued against him by the Additional District Judge, Dehradun, and demanded an immediate payment of ₹30,000.
The fraudsters allegedly provided him with five QR codes purportedly in the name of the District Judge to facilitate the payment. Kumar reported the matter to the Haridwar police, but with no action forthcoming, he approached the High Court for relief.
Taking cognisance of the rising incidents of ‘digital arrest’ scams, where fraudsters impersonate law enforcement agencies to extort money, the court decided to treat the matter as a PIL in public interest. In the previous hearing on August 27, the court had asked Kumar to implead the RBI and banks as parties. Accepting them as respondents, the bench has now issued notices and sought their replies.
