According to the National Crime Records Bureau’s latest report for 2023, Meghalaya recorded 64 cases of cybercrime. Nearly 70 percent of these — 29 involving fraud and 17 involving sexual exploitation — made up the bulk of the cases in the state. Nationally, by contrast, fraud accounted for about 68.9 percent of cybercrime cases, while sexual exploitation formed only about 4.9 percent.
Though the raw numbers in Meghalaya are modest, experts say they reveal a state facing digital vulnerabilities — where misuse of technology, social media, and weak awareness around online safety leave citizens exposed.
FCRF Launches CCLP Program to Train India’s Next Generation of Cyber Law Practitioners
What the Data Discloses and What It Conceals
The NCRB figures show both an increase in cybercrime broadly (31.2 percent nationwide from 2022 to 2023) and a stark disparity in case types when comparing Meghalaya to other regions.
However, Meghalaya’s lower case count also suggests possible underreporting. Remote areas, patchy internet access, and reluctance to engage law enforcement may obscure the full extent of cyber threats in the state. Moreover, sexual exploitation and fraud, especially those involving intimate or personal material, often carry shame, social stigma, or fear of retaliation — factors that discourage reporting.
Comparing State and National Trends
Nationally, the picture is one in which fraud overwhelmingly dominates cybercrime, while sexual exploitation — though serious — accounts for a smaller share. Meghalaya’s roughly 26.6 percent rate of sexual exploitation among its cyber-crimes is markedly higher than the national rate of about 4.9 percent.
Other crime indicators for Meghalaya further complicate the landscape: in 2023, the state recorded 628 crimes against women, several times higher than in many neighboring states. Meanwhile, overall crime per lakh population rose from 422.2 in 2022 to 448.3 in 2023.
Challenges of Enforcement, Awareness, and Policy
Authorities in Meghalaya face multiple hurdles: limited cyber forensics capacity, resource constraints, and geographical challenges. Remote districts may lack access to dedicated cyber cells or skilled investigators.
Meanwhile, public awareness about what constitutes cybercrime — especially frauds that disguise themselves as legitimate transactions, or sexual content shared non-consensually — remains low in many communities. Education and legal literacy are emerging as essential tools for prevention.
Finally, even where law enforcement acts, the legal and procedural lag can blunt the impact: evidence may be lost, suspects escape jurisdiction, or judicial processes drag on. For Meghalaya, the NCRB data offers both a warning and an opportunity: to build infrastructure and trust so its cybercrime numbers do not simply grow — but are meaningfully curbed.
