New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked WhatsApp and other intermediaries to apprise it about their proposed measures to prevent digital arrest scams and related cybercrimes in the country.
In an order uploaded on the website with regard to the hearing conducted on October 29 in a suo motu case titled ‘In Re: Victims of Digital Arrest Related to Forged Documents’, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant asked WhatsApp and like intermediaries to simultaneously submit their proposals to the I4C (Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre).
The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, has listed the plea for further consideration November 23.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for WhatsApp, had told the bench the platform had taken preventive measures, including action against 9,400 accounts, and would file an affidavit detailing the steps undertaken.
He had said the platform was working on software to identify suspicious accounts and warn users.
“WhatsApp LLC (A Meta company) and other concerned intermediaries are also directed to apprise this Court of the measures they propose to undertake to prevent the digital arrest scams and related cybercrimes. They shall also simultaneously submit their proposals to the I4C,” the bench said in its order.
The top court, October 29, had said financial institutions must be held accountable for digital arrest scams and other cyber frauds, emphasising that banks should be required to compensate victims for losses suffered where an investigation establishes that the fraud occurred due to the institution’s failure to exercise due diligence.
“We reiterate and emphasise that the regulatory measures proposed by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) must mandate and incorporate suitable provisions that require financial institutions to indemnify victims of digital arrest scams and other cyber frauds and pay suitable compensation not less than the amount lost by the customer, where it is established that the fraud or crime occurred due to the failure on the part of the financial institution to exercise due diligence in preventing or reporting the act/incident,” the bench said in the order.
During the hearing, the CJI had questioned why banks could not intervene when customers suddenly attempted to transfer unusually large sums of money that were inconsistent with their established transaction patterns.
“We have also emphasised in the past various preventive safeguards that must be mandated for every financial institution. These may include temporarily suspending unusual or suspicious transactions inconsistent with the account’s past transaction history, automatically intimating such transactions to the nearest police station, and subsequently physically verifying the reported transactions to ascertain their genuineness,” the order said.
In order to ensure effective implementation of the regulatory measures proposed by the RBI, as well as the directions issued, the bench further directed the RBI to submit a list of all authorised financial institutions before this court on the next date of hearing.
Observing that despite the fact that cyber crimes fell by 50 per cent, yet victims lost Rs 800 crore so far this year, the bench had said the proposed RBI regulatory framework must incorporate enforceable provisions for compensation, preventive intervention and institutional accountability.
The CJI had said the bench would first examine the proposed RBI Know Your Customer (KYC) Amendment Directions, 2026, before permitting the regulatory process to proceed.
The directions are proposed to be notified by November 30 and operationalised by December 31.
Describing banks as a “protective umbrella” for vulnerable customers, the CJI had said financial institutions possess information about their account holders, including their transaction histories, and should use that knowledge to prevent fraud before money leaves an account.
Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre and other authorities, told the bench that substantial work had been undertaken to improve the detection of suspicious transactions and strengthen preventive mechanisms within the banking system.
The bench also directed the law enforcement agencies of all states and Union territories to submit reports detailing FIRs registered in digital arrest scam cases and the investigations arising from them.
The agencies have also been asked to provide suggestions for the prevention, detection and prosecution of such offences.
The DGPs of all states and Union territories have been directed to ensure compliance.
The bench directed that the reports be submitted to the inter-departmental committee coordinating the government’s response, and that the court also be forwarded to the committee.
