Why in the news?

  • The Supreme Court suggested assigning the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the growing menace of digital arrests carried out by fraudsters impersonating Judges and police officers using forged documents.

Digital Arrest

  • What is it?: Digital Arrest is a recent cyber scam where fraudsters impersonate law enforcement or government officials using digital platforms to extort money from victims by generating fear and intimidation, which is a form of organized cyber fraud targeting vulnerable individuals.
  • Modes Operandi:
    • Scammers pose as police, CBI, ED, or judicial authorities and contact victims via phone calls, emails, or messaging apps, claiming involvement in crimes like money laundering, drug trafficking, or sharing explicit content.​
    • Tactics include sending official-looking arrest warrants, fabricated evidence (sometimes using deepfake technology), conducting fake court proceedings via video call, and continuous digital surveillance.​
    • The victim is coerced to transfer money or share sensitive personal and financial information under threats of immediate arrest and legal actions.
  • Vulnerable Targets:
    • Targets include senior citizens, less tech-savvy individuals, and people under immediate stress or fear, who comply due to the urgency and authority projected by criminals.​
    • Scammers isolate victims by preventing them from contacting family or real officials, and use psychological manipulation, intimidation, and technical tools like AI voices and deepfakes to make the scam credible.
  • Impact on the Society:
    • Financial losses are substantial: e.g., first quarter 2024 losses via “digital arrest” scams were reported at ≈ ₹120.30 crore.
    • Several high-value cases: e.g., a scam involving a high-net-worth individual where fraudsters staged a fake Supreme Court hearing and extorted money via “digital arrest” threats.
    • The damage is not just financial but also psychological: victims intimidated, coerced, told to stay isolated, which underscores the fraudulent “virtual detention” dimension.
  • Legal Status and Provisions:
    • No provision of ‘Digital Arrest’ exists in Indian law or the Indian Penal Code; all claims of online “arrest” by law enforcement are fraudulent.​
    • Enforcement and detection are challenging due to cross-border call spoofing, multiple intermediaries, anonymity of fraudsters, delayed reporting, and victims’ fear/embarrassment.
    • Recent government and police advisories stress public awareness, digital literacy, and cautious behavior when receiving suspicious calls or messages.​
    • The CBI is considering nationwide, uniform investigations, and the judiciary urges legislation and resource support for efficient cybercrime management.
  • Way Forward:
    • Use of various provisions of IPC and IT Act against Digital Arrest-
      • Information Technology Act, 2000: e.g., section 66C (identity theft), 66D (cheating by personation using computer resource). 
      • Indian Penal Code (IPC): e.g., section 415 (cheating), section 503 (criminal intimidation), section 419 (cheating by personation) etc.
    • Amend IT act to incorporate provisions related to prosecution in cases of Digital arrests.
    • Increase citizen awareness regarding the arising digital threats and how to manage them.
    • Use official portals: e.g., national cybercrime helpline 1930 (India) for reporting.
    • Strengthening international cooperation and cyber-forensics to track perpetrators across borders.