New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has called cybercrime a form of “digital dacoity” and refused to combine more than 30 criminal cases filed against two people in different states. The cases are linked to allegations that a company’s bank account was used to receive money connected to online fraud.
The court said that people accused of such crimes cannot ask for cases to be moved together simply because it would be easier for them. It stressed that the rights of victims and the work of investigating agencies must also be protected.
Why Did the Supreme Court Refuse the Request?
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, heard a request from Gourab Kumar Saha and Nidhi Bhandari.
The two wanted more than 30 criminal cases against them to be brought together. These cases are pending in different states.
The judges refused to grant their request. They said that combining the cases could create problems for investigations taking place in different parts of the country.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi also questioned why people who had lost money should have to travel to Delhi just to make things easier for the accused.
An Elderly Man Lost ₹1.90 Crore
During the hearing, Chief Justice Surya Kant referred to a case involving an 81-year-old man from Ernakulam, Kerala.
According to the court, the elderly man was allegedly cheated of ₹1.90 crore. The money was deposited into a bank account linked to the accused.
The court expressed concern over organised cybercrime groups that target senior citizens through fake digital arrest threats.
In a digital arrest scam, fraudsters may pretend to be police officers or other government officials. They frighten people by claiming that they are involved in a crime and then pressure them to transfer money.
The Supreme Court said that people involved in such activities should face strict action under the law.
Why Should Victims Not Have to Travel Far?
The court said that the convenience of the accused cannot be more important than the rights of victims and the needs of investigators.
Justice Bagchi explained that victims should not be forced to travel to another city just because the accused wants the cases to be heard in one place.
He also pointed out that the money involved in cybercrime can move across countries. Victims should not be expected to travel abroad to seek justice simply because their money has reached another country.
Cases Pending in Several States
According to the information presented in court, 35 cybercrime cases are pending against the two accused. These cases include complaints from Delhi, Maharashtra, Kerala, Telangana and Gujarat.
The Supreme Court refused to grant the requested relief. The petitioner later withdrew the plea.
What Does This Mean for People?
The case highlights the serious harm that online fraud can cause, especially to elderly people who may be frightened by fake calls from people pretending to be officials.
People should never transfer money simply because someone threatens them over a phone or video call. Genuine officials should not use threats to force people to make payments.
Anyone who suspects an online financial scam should contact the police or report it through India’s official cybercrime reporting portal at cybercrime.gov.in. Victims can also call the national cybercrime helpline at 1930 for help with financial cyber fraud.
The Supreme Court’s message is clear: online fraud is a serious matter, and the justice system must protect victims while allowing investigations to continue according to law.
Leave a Reply