/
Supreme Court asks WhatsApp to detail digital arrest safeguards; hearing on 23 November
In its suo motu case on digital arrest scams, a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant told WhatsApp and other intermediaries to set out their preventive measures and send them to I4C. It also said banks that miss due diligence should compensate victims. Next hearing is on 23 November.
S
4 min
A Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant has told WhatsApp and other intermediaries to set out the measures they plan to take against digital arrest scams and related cyber crimes, and to send the same proposals to the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, known as I4C. The direction comes in the court's own case on the subject, titled In Re: Victims of Digital Arrest Related to Forged Documents, and the order, dated 29 October 2026, was put on the court's website and reported on 10 November. The bench also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. The case is listed next on 23 November. This report is for information only.
A digital arrest scam is one in which a caller pretends to be a police, customs or court official, tells the victim that they are under arrest or investigation, keeps them on a video call and pressures them into transferring money. The court took up the matter on its own after the Union government's status report on the steps taken since its directions of February 2026. Victims are often told not to tell anyone and to stay on the call while they move their savings, which is why the court has asked the platforms that carry the calls, and the banks that carry the money, to answer for their part.
What the court asked of platforms and banks
The order is addressed first to WhatsApp LLC and other intermediaries, meaning the messaging and calling services that scammers use. Each must tell the court what preventive measures it proposes against digital arrest scams and related crimes, and at the same time send its proposals to I4C, the Ministry of Home Affairs body that coordinates action on cyber crime. The amicus curiae assisting the court is Senior Advocate N S Nappinai.
Reports from the hearing say that the senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for WhatsApp, told the bench that the platform had acted against about 9,400 accounts and would file an affidavit describing its steps. That figure comes from what was said in court, and the affidavit had not been filed when this was written.
On money, the court said the regulatory framework of the Reserve Bank of India should make financial institutions indemnify victims, paying at least the amount lost, where the institution failed in its due diligence. The RBI has been asked to submit a list of all authorised financial institutions by the hearing on 23 November. The order also repeats that banks should temporarily suspend unusual transactions, alert the nearest police station and physically verify transactions that have been flagged. It is not clear from the reports whether that last point is a new direction or a restatement of earlier ones.
States, earlier directions and the shared liability question
The order also deals with the police. Law enforcement agencies in all states and union territories have to report on the first information reports and investigations into digital arrest cases, and to suggest measures for preventing, detecting and prosecuting such offences. Copies of the reports given to the court are to go to the inter-departmental committee that coordinates the government's response, and directors general of police are responsible for compliance.
That sits on earlier directions in the same case. Reports say the court's August 2026 directions asked the RBI to adopt a standard procedure for temporary debit holds on accounts linked to cyber-enabled fraud, a grievance process and a module for restoring money to victims. They asked states and union territories to make their State Cyber Crime Coordination Centres operational, and asked the inter-departmental committee to examine a framework for shared liability and victim compensation.
The key points of the October order are these.
| Who | What the court asked |
|---|---|
| WhatsApp and other intermediaries | List preventive measures; send the same proposals to I4C |
| RBI | Framework requiring institutions to compensate victims where due diligence failed; list of authorised financial institutions by 23 November |
| Banks | Suspend unusual transactions, alert police, verify flagged transactions |
| States and union territories | Report on FIRs and investigations; suggest prevention and prosecution measures |
The 23 November hearing and who pays
The next date is 23 November, when the RBI's list and the platforms' proposals are due to be before the bench. One report of a related order gives 24 November, so the court's cause list should be checked for the final date. Nothing in the order sets a deadline for the platforms beyond that hearing, and it does not make any finding against WhatsApp or any other company.
The central question for victims is who pays. The court's remarks point towards banks bearing the loss where they missed warning signs, which would be a change from the usual position that a customer who authorises a transfer bears the loss. How far that is written into the RBI's rules will depend on what the central bank places before the court and on what the inter-departmental committee recommends. The court has so far asked for plans and reports, not set penalties, and it has left the detailed rules to those bodies.
Sources
About the Author
S
Subhash Gupta
Desk Editor
Subhash Gupta is a writer at Wirony, contributing articles that are reviewed and verified by the editorial team before publication. The publication prioritises accuracy, editorial…
S
4 min
What did you think?
