In a sweeping order that marks one of India’s most forceful judicial interventions into the country’s escalating cybercrime crisis, the Rajasthan High Court has refused bail to two men accused of orchestrating a “digital arrest” of an elderly couple—while simultaneously issuing an unprecedented blueprint for statewide cyber reform. The 34-page ruling reveals a judiciary increasingly alarmed by the speed and sophistication of modern financial fraud.
A High Court Confronts the Human Cost of Cybercrime
When Justice Ravi Chirania of the Rajasthan High Court convened hearings in October, he was not only presiding over two routine bail applications. Instead, the court found itself face-to-face with a disturbing portrait of India’s fastest-growing criminal economy.
The petitioners Adnan Haidar Bhai and Rahul Jagdish Bhai Jadhav, both in their early twenties—stand accused of impersonating cyber-police officials and extorting ₹2.02 crore from an 84-year-old Jodhpur resident, Prem Mohan Govila, and his wife. According to the FIR, the elderly couple were placed under what criminals now call a “digital arrest,” a tactic in which victims are coerced through video calls, threats of criminal charges, and fabricated government IDs.
Over nine days in April and May 2025, the couple transferred funds into nine bank accounts controlled by the accused and their associates. Bank statements reviewed by investigators confirmed that the petitioners alone received ₹45 lakh of the illicit deposits. During arguments, their counsel could not dispute that transactions had reached their accounts—a key factor in the court’s rejection of bail.
But beyond the individual case, the High Court’s order reflects an institution grappling with a much wider failure: the inability of state systems—police, banks, telecom providers and government departments—to keep pace with criminals exploiting India’s rapid digital transformation.
A Justice System Struggling to Catch Up
During the hearings, the court summoned top law-enforcement officials, including the Director General of Police and the Additional Director General heading the State Crime Records Bureau and Cyber Division. Their presentations revealed deep structural weaknesses.
The judge noted a recurring pattern across cyber-fraud cases:
- Investigations hampered by lack of technical expertise
- Inability to trace layered financial transactions spanning hundreds of mule accounts
- Rapid conversion of stolen money into cryptocurrencies beyond Indian jurisdiction
- A wide gap between the volume of cyber complaints and FIR registrations
The court cited data from the Union Home Ministry’s cybercrime reporting portal. Complaints rose from 26,049 in 2019 to more than 20 lakh in 2024, while FIRs grew at a fraction of that rate. Similarly, of ₹21,181 crore in reported fraud amounts in 2024, authorities managed to place lien on only ₹2,530 crore—an illustration of how quickly criminals move money out of the financial system.
Justice Chirania described state police systems as still trained for “traditional crimes,” ill-equipped to investigate digital offences requiring specialization in data analytics, cryptocurrency tracing, network forensics and OSINT. Even with assistance from central agencies like the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), the court found that “complete dependence on the Centre” has left states unprepared for real-time response.
A Blueprint for Cyber Governance: From SIM Cards to Gig Workers
What distinguishes this ruling from routine bail orders is the breadth of reforms directed at the Rajasthan government. The Court issued more than 35 operational directives, touching nearly every node of the digital ecosystem.
Among them:
Creation of a Rajasthan Cyber Crime Control Centre (R4C)
A state-level command unit modeled on the national I4C, empowered to coordinate prevention, detection, investigation and inter-agency action.
Hiring Technically Qualified Cyber Inspectors
For the first time, the state must recruit inspectors with specialized IT degrees and domain expertise—cyber forensics, network security, OSINT, data analytics—instead of relying on traditionally trained police officers. The court cited Punjab’s separate IT-Inspector cadre as a model.
Regulation of SIM Cards, Digital Devices and Call Centres
- No individual should hold more than three SIM cards without special authorization.
- All sales of digital devices must be logged with the Cyber Directorate.
- Call centers and BPOs must register with the state cyber authority to prevent misuse.
Oversight of Banks and Fintech Platforms
Banks must deploy AI tools—such as RBI’s Mule Hunter—to detect mule accounts, re-verify KYC for dormant profiles, restrict internet banking for digitally illiterate account holders, and physically visit homes of vulnerable customers after sudden high-value transfers.
New Rules for Gig Workers and E-commerce Delivery Staff
Delivery personnel and ride-share drivers must undergo police verification, display QR-coded uniforms, and adhere to identity-verification protocols under a newly created cyber compliance regime.
The order extends into schools, social-media identity verification, digital-evidence labs, public-prosecutor training, and mandatory audits of government departments.
In effect, the Court proposes a cyber-regulatory architecture that spans policing, banking, technology, transportation, e-commerce and education—a rare moment where judicial authority attempts to fill a policy void.
Digital India’s Growing Pains and a Judiciary on Alert
The Rajasthan High Court’s decision lands during a period of heightened national anxiety over cybercrime—particularly fraud targeting senior citizens, where impersonation and psychological coercion often replace technical hacking.
“Digital arrest” cases like the Govila incident are among the most traumatic manifestations, blending financial extortion with emotional manipulation. According to investigators, the elderly couple complied out of fear after being falsely told their bank accounts were implicated in a ₹538-crore laundering scheme spanning 230 accounts.
As India expands its digital infrastructure—with universal UPI adoption, growing e-commerce penetration and rapid shifts toward AI-driven banking—the ruling suggests that the country’s legal and administrative systems face an inflection point. Without structural cyber governance, local police stations and state banks may remain the weakest links in a fast-moving national threat landscape.
Author: Adv. (Dr.) Nisheeth Dixit is a distinguished practicing advocate (since 2001) specializing in Cyber Law, Cyber Security, Digital Forensics, Data Protection and Privacy Laws. His practice spans Constitutional, Civil, Criminal and Corporate matters across various courts in India, with expertise in business and telecommunication laws, economic offences, media and IPR laws, real estate, banking and aviation regulations. He regularly handles complex cybercrime cases involving hacking, phishing, identity theft, data breaches, SIM swapping, banking frauds, cyber defamation, and offences against women and children.
