Hyderabad’s Cybercrime Police have launched a formal investigation against Shaadi.com after a woman doctor was duped of Rs 11 lakh through a fake profile on the platform. The accused, J Vamshi Krishna, reportedly created a false identity using a premium account to lure the victim with marriage promises.
Krishna manipulated the platform’s services to gain direct access to the victim without background checks or verification. Claiming financial distress, he convinced the woman to transfer money and later threatened her using sensitive personal information. Officials described this as a case of calculated emotional blackmail paired with financial exploitation.
Negligent Verification, Profit Motive: Shaadi.com Under Fire
Investigations revealed that Krishna had committed similar offenses in at least 20 other cases across multiple states. Despite marketing its premium profiles as “verified,” Shaadi.com reportedly failed to authenticate documents or verify identity, allowing fraudsters to exploit loopholes unchecked.
ALSO READ: Call for Cyber Experts: Join FCRF Academy as Trainers and Course Creators
Sources in the cybercrime unit criticized the platform’s revenue-first model, which prioritized subscriptions over user safety. The suspect’s fraudulent profile was approved and allowed to communicate directly with users without mandatory safety protocols like ID verification, raising concerns about intermediary accountability.
Legal Consequences and Policy Implications for Digital Platforms
The police have booked Shaadi.com under provisions of the Information Technology Act and relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The case is being investigated not only as a standalone fraud but also as a precedent for digital intermediary responsibility under India’s evolving cyber laws.
This high-profile booking has renewed debate around India’s digital ecosystem and the lack of regulation around matrimonial and dating platforms. Cybersecurity experts argue that if platforms advertise “verified” services, they must also be held accountable for failures that arise from their lack of due diligence.