Criminal Case

“Digital arrest” scams—a form of fraud where criminals impersonate police officers, investigative agencies, or even judicial authorities to intimidate victims and extort money. Recognizing the seriousness of this growing threat, the Supreme Court of India has recently taken strong note of the issue and emphasized the responsibility of banks to actively protect customers from suspicious transactions.

The observations made during the hearing highlight not only the legal seriousness of such frauds but also the need for stronger institutional safeguards. Legal professionals, including Advocates-on-Record (AoR) such as Tushar Garg, and other members of the bar continue to monitor these developments closely because they directly affect citizens’ financial security and trust in the justice system.

Understanding the “Digital Arrest” Scam

Digital arrest scams typically involve fraudsters contacting victims through phone calls, video calls, or messages, falsely claiming that the individual is involved in a criminal investigation. Victims are pressured into transferring large sums of money under the pretext of “verification,” “bail,” or avoiding arrest.

These scams have become widespread across India, with courts acknowledging that the modus operandi often includes forged court documents, fake warrants, and impersonation of senior officials. The Supreme Court has previously described such acts as a direct assault on the dignity of the institution, noting that forged judicial orders undermine public trust in the justice system.

In several cases, victims—especially senior citizens—have been coerced into transferring life savings under psychological pressure and fear.

Supreme Court’s Strong Observations

During a recent hearing, the Supreme Court of India expressed deep concern over the scale of financial losses caused by digital arrest scams. The bench noted that cyber fraudsters have siphoned off tens of thousands of crores nationwide and described such activities as nothing less than organized financial crime.

The Court emphasized that banks must not remain passive intermediaries. Instead, they must develop systems capable of identifying unusual financial behaviour. For example, if a customer who normally withdraws small amounts suddenly initiates a transfer of ₹25 lakh or ₹50 lakh, banks should immediately generate alerts and verify the transaction.

The Chief Justice also questioned why AI-enabled banking systems fail to detect such abnormal transactions, stressing that financial institutions hold public trust and therefore carry a duty to safeguard depositors’ funds.

Banks Directed to Strengthen Preventive Mechanisms

The Court has urged banks to implement robust technological solutions such as AI-based monitoring tools to flag suspicious transactions in real time. These measures may include:

1. Instant alerts to customers

2. Temporary suspension of large or unusual transfers

3. Prompt reporting to cybercrime authorities

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has already drafted a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that includes provisions for temporary debit restrictions when fraud is suspected. The Court directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to formally adopt and implement this SOP across the country.

Additionally, the Supreme Court highlighted that banks must act proactively rather than waiting for complaints after funds have already been siphoned off.

A Wider Institutional Concern

The Court’s remarks also reflect broader concern about systemic gaps in addressing cybercrime. Observations during the proceedings indicated that banks sometimes become channels through which stolen money is quickly moved, unintentionally facilitating criminal activity.

The judiciary stressed the importance of coordinated action between the RBI, Department of Telecommunications, law enforcement agencies, and government ministries to create a nationwide mechanism for prevention and victim compensation.

Previous cases have also shown the Court’s strict stance against perpetrators, including denying bail to accused persons involved in digital arrest fraud targeting vulnerable victims.

Impact on Citizens and Legal Community

For ordinary citizens, the Court’s intervention provides reassurance that authorities are taking the threat seriously. Many victims of digital arrest scams have lost significant savings, sometimes accumulated over decades.

From a legal perspective, practitioners such as AoR Tushar Garg and other Supreme Court advocates closely follow these developments because they involve evolving interpretations of financial liability, institutional responsibility, and cybercrime enforcement. These hearings also signal a growing judicial expectation that banks must act as custodians—not merely service providers—when dealing with public funds.

Why Awareness Is Equally Important

While institutional safeguards are critical, awareness among citizens remains the first line of defense. Authorities repeatedly emphasize that legitimate law enforcement agencies do not conduct arrests through video calls or demand payments for investigation clearance.

Public education campaigns, stronger banking alerts, and rapid response systems together can significantly reduce the success rate of such scams.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of India’s recent observations mark an important step in addressing the rapidly expanding menace of digital arrest scams. By directing banks to implement systems that detect suspicious transactions and immediately alert customers, the Court has reinforced the principle that financial institutions must actively protect public money.

As cybercrime continues to evolve, coordinated efforts between banks, regulators, law enforcement, and the judiciary will be essential. The involvement of experienced legal professionals, including Advocates-on-Record like Tushar Garg, ensures that these issues remain under continuous judicial scrutiny.

Ultimately, the Court’s message is clear: safeguarding citizens from digital fraud is a shared responsibility, and proactive prevention is far more effective than post-crime recovery.

About AOR Tushar Garg

Advocate Tushar Garg is an Advocate-on-Record (AOR) at the Supreme Court of India, a designation that allows him to officially act and file matters on behalf of clients before the apex court.

He holds professional qualifications in law, including B.A. LL.B. and LL.M., and has built his legal career through active practice associated with proceedings in the Supreme Court of India. His role as an AOR reflects a specialized status earned through additional eligibility requirements and examination prescribed under the Supreme Court Rules, enabling him to represent litigants directly in the Court’s filings and procedural matters