'Police Can't Say It Has "Bigger Scams" To Unearth': Bombay HC Pulls Up Cops For Delay In Probing Case Of Sr Citizen Who Lost ₹32 Lakhs To Cyber Fraud

While hearing the petition filed by a septuagenarian woman, who was kept in 'digital arrest' and duped of Rs 32 lakhs, the Bombay High Court on Thursday pulled up the police officers of the Mumbai Police who initially refused to lodge the FIR and then conducted a 'shabby probe.'

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale expressed displeasure over how the police officials at the Shivaji Nagar Police Station in Mumbai's Govandi area dealt with the case of a senior citizens by refusing to lodge her FIR and telling her that they have 'bigger scams' to probe.

"Your (State Police) officers are saying we have bigger scams to uncover isn't a ground for not investigating the case... Whenever a citizen approaches the police they need to investigate and lodge FIR...You cannot tell the citizen that no we have bigger scams to unearth especially to a senior citizen. You lodged the FIR only after nearly two months of her running from pillar to post... A digital arrest took place but you did nothing...By the time you lodged the FIR, she lost all her money and then you did not investigate the case properly. Is this how you treat senior citizens?," a visibly irked Justice Mohite-Dere remarked. 

The bench also lost its cool after hearing the explanation put forth by the concerned officer, who was present in the court, and told the judges that the Cyber Cell of the Mumbai Police cannot investigate into cyber fraud's which are below Rs 10 lakh.

"What is this happening? How can you say this? What if a senior citizen comes to you saying he or she lost Rs 50k? You will have to give an undertaking that you will never say that the amount is below Rs 10 lakh so you won't investigate... Why this Rs 10 lakhs cap? What if someone has lost Rs 9.50 lakh? What will you do then?" Justice Mohite-Dere asked.

Meanwhile, a Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), overseeing the national cyber fraud helpline number 1930, who was virtually present in the court, told the bench that the ministry has never issued such an advisory to the Mumbai division of the cyber cell not to investigate cases which involving amount less than Rs 10 lakh. 

"When the MHA has not given such advisory, how can you classify the complaints? A fraud is a fraud...It won't be fair to a senior citizen, who loses one lakh because that can be a huge amount for him... It's will be unfair if the cyber cell says they can't probe because the amount is small...No amount is small for anybody..." Justice Mohite-Dere observed. 

The bench then told the DCP to issue guidelines clarifying that no such cap of Rs 10 lakh has ever been imposed, and the police investigating such cases have to file an FIR and investigate the case, whatever the amount. 

The DCP then showed the judges the website, which deals with cyber frauds and is accessible to the citizens. He particularly focused on the dashboard section of the website, which is accessible only to police officers. He showed how this website helps to track an amount's transaction and even provides quick CCTV footages of banks or ATMs from where the said amount is withdrawn by the fraudsters. 

"This is a comprehensive portal and is available only with India, United States and Europe. Only thing is that the officer, who is receives the complaint, has to immediately act and upload the details of the complaint on this website and immediately it will help in tracking the fraud transactions and how and where the money is withdrawn," the officer told the bench.

Having heard this, the judges remarked that in the instant case, the police 'missed the golden chance' to nab the accused in time. 

"Such a convenient and easily accessible website it is. The portal is so simple to operate. Is this the first such case before you? It's been so much user friendly. You being the Investigating Officer (IO) it's your duty... For CCTV footages you just need to request on this site. The lady has to come to the court for seeking a fair probe. This is not the way you can treat a senior citizen," the bench observed. 

The bench further slammed the officers for failing to take prompt action in disbursing the recovered amount of Rs 3 lakhs to the petitioner, who wanted the same for her knee surgery.

"A senior citizens complaint cannot be ignored like this...It is your duty not the complainant's duty... don't pass the buck... Complainant will only give you the information it's your duty to probe... It's your mistake because you delayed and by now the amount may have been even withdrawn..." the judges told the officers, who tried to submit that the complainant failed to comply with the procedure for obtaining the recovered money from the court. 

During the hearing, the judges told the DCP present virtually, to personally conduct a workshop for the Mumbai Cyber Police officials as it appeared that they do not know how to operate the national portal.

"If the officers don't know how to operate the portal, please take help from MHA office to train or teach them... Have a workshop... Because in the process the money is gone completely by that time...The MHA have done so much but at the ground level no one knows...The MHA officers are taking good steps to ensure that people are made aware about digital arrests...Police must take immediate steps by lodging FIRs and uploading the same on the dedicated portal so then it would be easier to trace where the money went and the end user who withdrew it....They have made everything easy but it's now your (State Police) duty to act immediately," the judges observed. 

The judges therefore, asked Chief Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar to speak t the Director General of Police (DGP) and also the Commissioner of Police (CP) regarding the workshop especially in view of the instant case.

"A lady who is 71 year old, has lost her money, why she has to follow up with you keep calling you for her own money ? We don't understand why you lack discipline when it comes to common man.. you cannot compel a senior citizen to run from pillar to post...This kind of or the manner in which the matter is dealt, we aren't convinced. Just because your officers haven't acted promptly, she lost her money," Justice Mohite-Dere underscored. 

The bench therefore, ordered the two officers, who delayed the probe in the instant case, to file their personal affidavits explaining their conduct. 

Background:

The judges were hearing a petition filed by one Leela Parthasarathy (71), a retired Maths teacher- was under a 'digital arrest' by fraudsters posing to be Enforcement Directorate (ED) sleuths, for two weeks. During this period, the fraudsters, who furnished important documents like Aadhar Card etc to the petitioner, she believed them to be real officers and therefore, abided by whatever they ordered her. She transferred Rs 2 lakhs, then Rs 12 lakhs and finally Rs 18 lakhs - an amount the fraudsters said were 'proceeds of crime.'

According to Parthasarathy's counsel Nikhil Daga, she gave up all her lifetime savings including gold jewellery to the fraudsters. It was only when they asked her to transfer Rs 20 lakh for bail, she approached her brother-in-law in Bangalore, who then go in touch with her daughter in the United States (US) and then a complaint was filed with the Shivaji Nagar Police Station in Govandi, Mumbai.

However, the petitioner alleged that the senior officer of the Shivaji Nagar Police Station, initially refused to register her First Information Report (FIR) and it was only lodged after two months of running from pillar to post. She alleged that when she contacted the 1930 helpline number, it was not operating and did not help.