Sinister Masquerading

The extent to which a human mind can think about crime is bizarre. The latest is digital arrest. Duping a common man of hard-earned money is heinous. One must note—there is no provision for digital arrest under Indian law. Staying informed is the best precaution against such crimes.

Digital arrest is a kind of fraud in which impersonators use spoofed phone numbers, messages, WhatsApp, texts, emails, etc., to pose as police or legal authorities including the CBI, tax officers, customs, law enforcement officers, and other government officials. Scammers attempt to scare victims by employing strategies like fake digital arrests or threats of prosecution and serious legal action to compel people to disclose information relating to their accounts or even transfer money.

Some of the modi operandi include the impersonators convincing the victim that they are being investigated for crimes. When victims claim innocence or express ignorance of the alleged crime, the criminal—posing as a law enforcement officer or agency—may even convince them that their identity was stolen and misused, often deceiving them with false sympathy. The offenders have reportedly isolated victims by holding them under a so-called ‘digital arrest.’ Offenders have posed to victims that they are under surveillance and kept them under it for several hours. Then come demands for urgent payments or sharing of sensitive information.

Common ploys used in digital arrest scams include deceiving victims into believing that some legal issue is being corrected, or that the exercise is to prove their innocence. These tactics are often disguised as assistance or participation in an ongoing investigation and typically include false threats of arrest or prosecution.

Senior citizens are hoaxed a lot. The modus operandi of criminals seems to focus on senior citizens since they may not be tech-savvy, may stay alone, and can be blackmailed through fear of running to courts or authorities. This can rob them of their life savings.

A person committing a “digital arrest” may be charged with impersonating a public servant, cheating, criminal intimidation, forgery, extortion, theft, etc., under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 are also attracted. Depending on the crime, provisions such as identity theft and cheating by personation using computer sources may apply.

The government has taken many proactive steps to protect citizens from such fraud. There is a need for mandatory inbuilt systems for the prevention of such crimes. One such approach could involve making it mandatory for banks to contact customers who do not typically make large transactions whenever such payments occur. While some banks already follow this practice, formalizing it as a regulatory requirement would enhance customer safety. Additionally, banks could be required to regularly educate their customers through known officials about emerging digital scams through periodic awareness calls and messages.

Known bank personnel educating customers makes more sense. Another preventive measure could include mandatory verification calls when significant payments are made to unknown, suspicious, or new entities. Furthermore, a safeguard mechanism could be developed that temporarily restricts the withdrawal or transfer of such funds by the receiving party for a period of 4–5 days. This buffer would offer critical time to detect and respond to fraudulent activity, potentially minimizing financial losses.

While steps like transaction alerts, two-factor authentication, certain verification calls, fraud detection systems, RBI guidelines, number series for transaction calls, NPCI systems, etc., are in place, they need to be combined with more robust techniques involving close personal engagement with customers, coupled with AI. For senior citizens and the divinely abled, it should be made even more mandatory for banks to initiate regular calls as well as video calls—recorded and conducted through designated officers handling their accounts. It’s a well-known fact that many seniors often act as sources of wisdom, guiding younger generations and spreading awareness.

Recently, the Supreme Court, in the case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr., quoting its 2022 decision and earlier directions, issued instructions that all States/UTs must issue a Standing Order to their respective police machinery to serve notices under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, or Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, only through the modes prescribed under the respective laws. The Court made it amply clear that service of notice through WhatsApp or other electronic modes cannot be considered or recognised as an alternative or substitute for the modes of service recognised and prescribed under CrPC, 1973 or BNSS, 2023. This order will protect innocent citizens from various dubious crimes.

Precaution is better than cure. Establishing proactive mechanisms within systems will safeguard citizens from digital fraud to a large extent.

The writer is a practising Advocate in the Supreme Court and High Court of Delhi. Views expressed are personal