Wife Loses Mobile Number After Husband's 'Bogus' Complaint: Allahabad High Court Questions Cyber Cell
Allahabad High Court questions prolonged blocking of woman's mobile number.
Pulling up the Lucknow Cyber Cell for "callous" handling of a complaint that allegedly stemmed from a matrimonial dispute, the Allahabad High Court has directed a woman's husband to explain why damages should not be imposed on him for getting a 'bogus complaint' lodged against her mobile number, which remained blocked for so long that it was eventually allotted to another subscriber.
Court also expressed dissatisfaction with the conduct of the Cyber Cell, observing that officials had mechanically invoked Ministry of Home Affairs directions relating to cyber complaints and wronged the petitioner through their handling of the matter.
A division bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena described the stand taken by the In-charge, Cyber Cell, Police Commissionerate, Lucknow, in his personal affidavit as "very irresponsible".
The observations came while the bench was hearing a petition filed by Shraddha Pathak, who sought restoration of her mobile number. The court noted that there appeared to be a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and respondent no. 5, Abhishek Pathak, and that the complaint leading to the blocking of the number was attributable to him.
"There is apparently a misuse in the petitioner's case," the bench observed, adding that the husband had caused "some kind of a bogus complaint" to be lodged. Court said that in response to the complaint, the Cyber Cell mechanically invoked Home Ministry directions regarding blocking, debiting and freezing data received through the Cyber Portal.
The bench underlined that such directions were not intended to be misused. According to the court, the petitioner's phone number remained blocked for such a prolonged period that it was eventually allotted to another customer by the telecom service provider.
Also Read| Cyberbullying Can Be as Traumatic as Physical Assault, Says Delhi High Court
When the petitioner sought restoration of her number, the Cyber Cell informed the court that the telecom company had already reassigned it. The bench, however, found the situation unacceptable and remarked that a citizen could not be wronged in such a manner because of the callous handling of state agencies.
Notice was issued in the petition. While notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 was accepted by the State, the court granted two weeks' time for filing a counter-affidavit.
Why has the High Court asked the husband to show cause on damages?
Apart from directing restoration of the petitioner's number, court required the husband to file a counter affidavit showing cause as to why damages should not be awarded against him for allegedly lodging a frivolous complaint against his wife's phone number.
The bench directed the In-charge, Cyber Cell, Commissionerate Lucknow, to immediately get in touch with the telecom service provider concerned, stated to be Jio Telecom Service Limited, and take necessary steps for restoration of the petitioner's mobile number.
Also Read| Parliamentary Committee Stresses Cybercrime Awareness Amid Digital Surge
The officer has also been directed to file his own affidavit within a week after taking the required steps.
Court further ordered that its directions be served upon the In-charge, Cyber Cell, Lucknow, and respondent no. 5 through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow.
Case Title: Smt. Shraddha Pathak v. State of U.P. and 4 Others
Order Date: May 15, 2026
Bench: Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena