ExplainedCybercrime
Digital arrest scams explained: how the fraud works and what the Supreme Court wants banks and WhatsApp to do
On Tuesday the Supreme Court's order in the digital arrest case became public: WhatsApp must say how it will stop the scam, and banks may have to repay victims in full. What a 'digital arrest' is, why it is not a real arrest, and what you should do if the call comes.
The short answer
A 'digital arrest' is a fraud in which callers pose as police or investigators, claim you are linked to a crime, keep you on a video call and make you transfer money to prove your innocence. No Indian law allows an arrest over a phone or video call. On November 10, 2026, the Supreme Court's order made public asked WhatsApp and other platforms to file their plans against the scam and told the RBI its rules must make banks pay victims at least the amount lost where they failed in due diligence. The case is back in court on November 23.
What is a digital arrest?
It is a fraud, not a procedure. The caller says he is from the police, the CBI, the Enforcement Directorate or a narcotics agency. He tells you that your Aadhaar number, your bank account or a parcel in your name has been linked to a crime such as money laundering or drug smuggling. He says you are under “digital arrest” and must stay on a video call until the matter is “verified”.
The phrase appears in no Indian law. No agency can arrest anyone over a phone or video call, and none asks for money to close a case. The Supreme Court has called the forged orders used in these calls “a matter of grave concern” and said such acts “cannot be treated as ordinary or routine offences”.
How the scam works
Fear and isolation do the work, not technology. Reports on the pattern describe the same sequence. First comes the call, often from a number that looks official. Then forged notices, fake identity cards and sometimes a staged “court” or office backdrop appear on the video screen. The victim is told the case is secret and that speaking to family or a lawyer will make it worse.
Then comes the money. The victim is told to move savings into a “safe” or “verification” account, to be returned once cleared. The accounts belong to the gang, often hired “mule” account holders, and the money is split and moved on within hours. The scam ends when the victim stops answering or the gang asks for more.
How big is the problem?
Large enough to have reached the Supreme Court twice. Portal data summarised in a recent reference note counts 1,23,672 digital arrest complaints on the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal in 2024 and 58,239 in 2025. It puts January to August 2026 at 21,928 complaints with losses above ₹647 crore. These are complaints, not all incidents. The bench itself noted this week that cybercrime had reportedly fallen by 50%, yet victims had lost about ₹800 crore so far this year.
Why the Supreme Court is involved
A 73-year-old woman wrote to the Chief Justice. On October 17, 2025, the court took up the matter on its own after the woman, from Ambala in Haryana, wrote to the then Chief Justice, B R Gavai. She and her husband had been held under a fake digital arrest, shown forged court and agency orders, and made to transfer more than ₹1.05 crore.
Since then the court has asked every state and Union Territory for its case details and indicated it may hand cases with a pan-India or cross-border spread to the CBI. The Attorney General told the bench that gangs operate from outside India, including Myanmar and Thailand.
What the court said on November 10
Platforms must show their plan, and banks must pay. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana directed WhatsApp and other intermediaries to set out what they propose to do, and to send the same proposals to the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), the Union home ministry’s cybercrime body. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for WhatsApp, said the company had acted against 9,400 accounts and was building software to spot suspicious accounts and warn users.
For banks the direction is sharper. The bench said the RBI’s rules must make institutions indemnify victims and pay compensation not less than the amount lost wherever they failed in due diligence. The Chief Justice asked why banks do not step in when a customer suddenly moves unusually large sums that do not match his history. He called banks a “protective umbrella” for vulnerable customers. Suggested safeguards include temporarily suspending unusual transactions, alerting the nearest police station and physically verifying flagged transfers.
What changes for you
If the direction becomes an RBI rule, a victim of a fraud the bank should have caught could claim the full amount back from the bank, instead of chasing the money through police stations and courts. The RBI’s proposed Know Your Customer (Amendment) Directions, 2026 are due to be notified by November 30 and to take effect by December 31, and the court will examine them first. Nothing is binding yet: the order sets directions and a date, and the final rule is still to be written.
What to do if the call comes
Hang up, and do not pay anyone. The advice from the cybercrime authorities is consistent:
- Do not stay isolated on the video call. End it, and tell a family member or friend at once.
- Do not transfer money for “verification”, a “security deposit” or a “settlement”.
- Check any claim through the agency’s official website or listed numbers, never the number that called you.
- Report quickly on the cybercrime helpline 1930 or at cybercrime.gov.in, and inform your bank. Early reports give banks and police the best chance of freezing the money.
- Keep numbers, screenshots and transaction details.
What happens next
The case returns on November 23, 2026. By then WhatsApp and the other intermediaries are to have filed their proposals, the RBI a list of all authorised financial institutions, and state police their reports on FIRs and investigations. The answers will show how many accounts platforms block, and whether banks accept a duty to repay.