Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre, RBI, CBI Over ₹22.9 Crore ‘Digital Arrest Scam’ Targeting 82-Yr-Old Man

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi sought responses from the authorities, observing that the matter raised issues of grave public concern.

According to the plea, this is possibly the largest case of individual digital fraud in India’s history.

The petitioner, who lives alone while his children reside abroad, was allegedly trapped by cybercriminals impersonating Mumbai Police and telecom company officials. They shared forged Supreme Court and RBI orders via WhatsApp messages and video calls, coercing him into transferring his life savings under threat of arrest and property seizure.

Senior Advocate K. Parameshwar, appearing for the petitioner, told the Court that the incident represented “a complete failure of the banking system and regulatory oversight.” He pointed out that the fraud occurred when the petitioner’s children were abroad, leaving the octogenarian vulnerable.

“There is some duty that these banks also owe,” Parameshwar submitted. “He comes in a wheelchair; he is almost 82 years old. When transactions worth crores take place, the banks must show alertness.”

After hearing the submissions, the Court issued notice in the matter, except for prayers B, C, and D, for which the petitioner was permitted to approach the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).

Those specific prayers sought directions to the banks to deposit ₹22.92 crore in an escrow account under the Supreme Court’s supervision, to be released to the petitioner if the Court so directed.

The petition names Kotak Mahindra Bank, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, ICICI Bank, IndusInd Bank, City Union Bank, and Yes Bank among the respondents.

The writ petition, filed through AoR Abhinav Agrawal under Article 32 of the Constitution, urges the Supreme Court to direct the Union of India to frame and implement a uniform national policy to prevent and respond to digital-arrest scams, ensuring coordination between the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), RBI, and cybercrime agencies.

Among the key directions sought are:

-A real-time national system for detecting and freezing fraudulent inter-bank transfers;

-Identification and blocking of “mule accounts” used by scam networks;

-Enforcement of RBI’s Fraud Risk Management and Customer Protection Directions;

-A CBI-led investigation into the ongoing case registered as FIR No. 85/2025 in Delhi;

-Telecom-based fraud warning systems and real-time call blocking to disrupt scam operations; and

-Finance Ministry oversight of high-risk transactions across private and public sector banks.

Parameshwar particularly emphasized Prayer F of the petition, which seeks a mandamus to the RBI to compel banks to identify mule account operators and ensure refund of funds fraudulently transferred from the petitioner’s account.

Highlighting systemic lapses, the Senior Counsel argued that the banks’ failure to detect multiple high-value transfers over a short period amounted to gross negligence. He added that the petitioner was also considering approaching the consumer forum for compensation, alleging that the banks “did not implement the fraud detection safeguards they are mandated to maintain under RBI directions.”

Case Title: Naresh Malhotra V. Union Of India & Ors

Bench: Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi

Hearing Date: January 23, 2026