Digital arrest: When fear wears a police uniform
Why citizens must understand the law before they surrender to a cybercriminal’s authority
A phone rings. The caller introduces himself as a police officer, a CBI official, an Enforcement Directorate officer or sometimes even a judge. He informs you that your Aadhaar, mobile number, bank account or a parcel in your name has been linked to a serious criminal case. Within minutes, the conversation changes from an enquiry into an apparent crisis. You are told that you are under investigation, that an arrest warrant has been issued and that you must remain on a video call. You are instructed not to speak to anyone. Finally comes the demand for money-sometimes described as a "verification deposit", "security amount", "bail money," or "temporary transfer for investigation". This is a new kind of crime in which the criminal does not enter your house, break your lock or snatch your wallet. Instead, he enters your mind- this is the Digital-Arrest Scam.
The very first fact every citizen must remember is fundamental: there is no legal procedure in India called "Digital Arrest". A video call cannot substitute for a lawful arrest. The Rajasthan High Court, while taking suo motu cognisance of the growing menace in January 2025, specifically observed that digital arrest has no legal standing in India.
The psychology behind the fraud
What makes this crime particularly dangerous is that it exploits something valuable-the public's trust in Law Enforcement. The fraudster does not merely impersonate an officer. He creates an entire theatre of authority. Fake identity cards, fabricated notices, police uniforms, official logos, simulated offices and even additional callers posing as senior officers are used to make the deception convincing. The victim is then isolated and kept continuously connected to the fraudsters. The isolation is deliberate. A frightened person who is not allowed to consult family, friends or a lawyer is much easier to manipulate. The criminal's greatest weapon, therefore, is not technology- it is "fear".
What does the law actually say about arrest?
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs criminal procedure, lays down a legal framework for arrest- Section 35 specifies circumstances in which a police officer may arrest without a warrant. Section 36 prescribes important requirements relating to the arresting officer and the arrest process. Section 38 recognises the arrested person's right to meet an advocate of his choice during interrogation, subject to the statutory framework. The BNSS also requires important safeguards concerning information about the grounds of arrest and communication to a relative or other nominated person.
Section 57 requires a person arrested to be taken before the Magistrate or officer in charge as prescribed, while Section 58 provides that an arrested person cannot ordinarily be detained for more than 24 hours without the requisite judicial authority, subject to the statutory exceptions. Section 62 makes it explicit that arrest must be made strictly in accordance with the Sanhita.
These provisions illustrate an important principle: arrest is an exercise of legal power surrounded by procedural safeguards. It is not a threat that an unknown caller can manufacture over WhatsApp.
Here, we must understand that the BNSS does provide for electronic service of summons in specified circumstances. That, however, should not be confused with a so-called digital arrest. A genuine electronic summons is part of a formal legal process; it is not an instruction to transfer money to a private bank account.
Which laws can apply to the fraudsters?
There is no single offence in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita called "digital arrest". The expression describes the modus operandi. The actual offences have to be determined from the conduct proved during investigation. For example, BNS Section 318 deals with cheating. It covers deception that dishonestly or fraudulently induces a person to deliver property or to do something that causes, or is likely to cause, harm. The statutory illustration itself recognises cheating through false representation of official status. BNS Section 319 deals with cheating by personation and can be relevant where criminals impersonate officials or other persons to deceive victims.
Where fear or threats are used to obtain money, Section 308, relating to extortion, may also become relevant depending upon the facts. More complex cases may involve offences relating to forgery, forged electronic or documentary material, conspiracy, organised crime or provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The precise sections, however, must always be determined by the investigating agency on the evidence available in the particular case.
The digital trail is often the evidence trail
A victim may instinctively delete the offending messages or block the caller. From an investigative perspective, that can be a mistake- The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 expressly recognises electronic and digital records. Section 61 provides that an electronic or digital record cannot be denied admissibility merely because it is electronic or digital, subject to Section 63. Sections 62 and 63 prescribe the framework concerning electronic records and their admissibility. Therefore, a victim should preserve, wherever available:
- phone numbers and caller IDs;
- WhatsApp or other chat messages;
- screenshots;
- emails;
- forged notices or identity cards;
- bank account numbers;
- UPI IDs and transaction references;
- URLs and social-media profiles;
- call details and other relevant digital material.
Hence, do not delete evidences out of embarrassment or fear.
The police response: follow the money, technology and network
Modern cybercrime investigation cannot stop with identifying the person who made the call. The caller may be only one component of a much larger network. Behind a digital-arrest operation may be persons procuring SIM cards, opening or controlling mule bank accounts, arranging forged documents, providing technical infrastructure and moving the proceeds through multiple accounts. This is why effective investigation requires simultaneous examination of the communication trail, digital trail and money trail.
The Government has established the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) to strengthen coordination against cybercrime. I4C has also provided technical support to State and Union Territory police and facilitated action against digital infrastructure, SIM cards and mule accounts associated with such frauds. For the victim, however, one principle is especially important- report the crime as the earliest possible.
Report immediately.
The national cybercrime helpline 1930 and the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal provide mechanisms for reporting cybercrime. The Government has specifically advised citizens receiving digital-arrest-type calls to report them immediately. In financial cyber fraud, every minute can matter. The faster the complaint reaches the financial and law-enforcement ecosystem, the greater the opportunity for tracing the transaction and attempting to prevent further movement of the money.
What should you do if you receive such a call?
The following five principles should become part of every family's digital safety habit:
First, pause.
Do not make a financial decision while frightened.
Second, disconnect.
There is no need to remain continuously connected to an unknown caller merely because he claims to be an officer.
Third, verify independently.
If the caller claims to represent a government agency, obtain the agency's official contact details independently and verify the claim.
Fourth, never transfer money to prove your innocence.
Do not pay a so-called security deposit, verification amount, bail amount or investigation fee into an account specified by a caller.
Fifth, report immediately.
Call 1930, report through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal and inform your bank or payment service provider without delay if money has been transferred. In an immediate emergency, police assistance may also be sought through 112.
A special message for senior citizens
Senior citizens deserve particular attention because fraudsters often exploit their respect for official authority and their fear of legal consequences. Every family should have a simple rule- no major financial transfer will be made in response to an unexpected government or police call without first consulting another trusted person and independently verifying the communication.
Families should also ensure that elderly members know how to contact 1930, how to report suspicious transactions and whom to call if they receive a threatening video call. And if someone does become a victim, the first response should not be blame. A victim of cybercrime needs support, not embarrassment.
The real challenge is restoring confidence in the law
Digital-arrest scams are particularly dangerous because they turn the citizen's faith in the State into a weapon against the citizen. That is why public awareness is not an optional supplement to cyber policing. It is a core component of crime prevention.
A citizen should know that genuine legal processes have identifiable procedures, accountable authorities and statutory safeguards. A stranger on a video call cannot create a new category of arrest merely by wearing a uniform and displaying a forged document.
The safest response to a threatening digital call is therefore not confrontation and not panic. It is verification, disengagement and immediate reporting. As police officers, our responsibility is to investigate the crime, pursue the financial trail, identify the wider network and bring offenders to justice. But prevention begins much earlier-with an informed citizen who refuses to surrender judgment to fear.
In a nutshell: Stop- Verify- Do Not Pay- Preserve the Evidence- Call 1930.
The final message is simple- No genuine law-enforcement agency will put you under a "digital arrest" through a video call and demand money to establish your innocence. In the digital age, an alert citizen and a responsive police force together constitute the strongest defence against cybercrime.
The author is Deputy Inspector General of Police, Koshi Range, Saharsa, Bihar; Views presented are personal.
