One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.
Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.
It started simply enough. A resident of Gomti Nagar, Lucknow — let's call him Arjun Mehta — was approached by an acquaintance sometime around 18 February 2025. The acquaintance said he needed access to Arjun's Dream11 account for a single day and offered ₹1,000 in return. Arjun handed over the login credentials, logged out, and waited. The payment never arrived. Worse, the account was suspended. When Arjun followed up, the acquaintance offered excuses, then fell silent entirely.
Arjun consulted a local general practitioner advocate, who sent a standard legal notice citing breach of contract. The other party ignored it completely. After that, Arjun reached out to Advocate Sudhir Rao. The approach shifted immediately. A formal complaint was filed on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in), supported by screenshots of the conversation, transaction logs, and a structured complaint under Section 318 BNS read with Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000. A follow-up complaint was also lodged with the local cyber crime cell at Hazratganj Police Station, Lucknow. The other party, now facing coordinated legal pressure from multiple directions, made contact and settled the outstanding amount within three weeks. The matter was closed with a written acknowledgment. The earlier solo legal notice had produced nothing. The structured, domain-specific approach produced a result.
Advice in Such Cases
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Preserve all digital evidence immediately: Before doing anything else, take dated screenshots of every conversation, payment request, and profile of the accused. Don't delete anything, and don't send aggressive messages that could complicate your own position later.
File on cybercrime.gov.in without delay: The portal creates a timestamped record even before a formal FIR is registered. This record can be referenced in subsequent legal proceedings and signals seriousness to the accused.
Now, before you act — online fraud and account-based cheating cases carry specific procedural requirements under the BNSS and the IT Act. A general practitioner won't always be familiar with the evidentiary standards for digital evidence under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, or the complaint escalation mechanism under BNSS. Engaging an advocate who regularly handles cyber fraud and cheating matters typically results in faster resolution and far fewer procedural missteps.
Applicable Sections of Law
- Section 318 BNS (Cheating): Applies where a person dishonestly induces another to deliver property or credentials through deception. Covers the core conduct here — obtaining account access with false intent to pay.
- Section 319 BNS (Cheating by Personation): Where the accused used another person's account to misrepresent identity, this section can be invoked in addition to Section 318.
- Section 66C, Information Technology Act, 2000: Punishes identity theft, including dishonest use of another person's electronic credentials (login IDs and passwords).
- Section 66D, Information Technology Act, 2000: Covers cheating by personation using computer resources, directly applicable where account credentials are used fraudulently.
Punishment and Penalties
- Section 318 BNS: Imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both. If cheating involves delivery of property, imprisonment may extend to seven years with fine.
- Section 66C IT Act: Imprisonment up to three years and fine up to ₹1,00,000.
- Section 66D IT Act: Imprisonment up to three years and fine up to ₹1,00,000.
- Cognizable and non-bailable under Section 318 BNS (where cheating is of the aggravated type). Section 66C and 66D are cognizable and non-bailable.
- Section 318 in its basic form is compoundable with the court's permission; the IT Act offences generally are not.
Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case
For cybercrime and online cheating matters, territorial jurisdiction lies with the police station in whose area the victim received the fraudulent communication or where the loss occurred — in this case, the victim's place of residence. Complaints should be filed at the nearest cyber crime police station or, where none exists, the local police station. Judicially, the case would be tried before a Judicial Magistrate First Class having jurisdiction over that area. The National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in) provides an additional federal avenue. And here's the thing — as held in Shamsher Singh Verma v. State of Haryana, 2015, proper territorial jurisdiction is a foundation of fair trial, and filing in the wrong court can delay proceedings significantly.
What if Police Refuse to File FIR?
Refusals do happen, especially where the amount involved appears small. But refusal doesn't end your options.
- Submit a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS, requesting direction to register the FIR.
- File a private complaint directly before the Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 175(3) BNSS — the magistrate can direct the police to register and investigate.
- Approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus compelling FIR registration, as affirmed in Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP, 2014, where the Supreme Court held that registration of FIR is mandatory for cognizable offences.
- File a complaint with the State Cyber Crime Cell directly, bypassing the local police station.
Rights of the Accused
Even in cases like this, the accused retains constitutional rights. These are worth knowing whether you're the complainant anticipating arrest or an accused party.
- Right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution — no person can be compelled to be a witness against themselves.
- Right to legal representation under Article 22(1) — the accused has the right to consult and be defended by an advocate of their choice from the moment of arrest.
- Right to be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest under Article 22(2) and Section 58 BNSS.
- Right to a copy of the FIR and to know the grounds of arrest under Section 47 BNSS.
- Right to have a family member or friend informed of the arrest under Section 48 BNSS.
Bail Provisions
Section 318 BNS in its basic form is bailable. The aggravated form — cheating with delivery of property — is non-bailable. IT Act offences under Sections 66C and 66D are non-bailable. Where non-bailable, the accused can apply for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS before arrest, or regular bail under Section 480 BNSS after arrest. Bail conditions typically include surrender of passport, periodic reporting to the police station, and a personal bond with surety. Frankly, in cyber fraud cases involving digital evidence, courts sometimes impose conditions restricting internet usage or device access during trial — something many accused don't anticipate. Bail strategy should be planned in consultation with an advocate familiar with cyber crime proceedings.
Quashing of FIR / Case
Under Section 528 BNSS, the High Court retains inherent power to quash an FIR or criminal proceedings. Quashing is considered where the complaint discloses no prima facie cognizable offence, where it is filed as an abuse of legal process, or where the matter is compoundable and the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement. In cases of simple cheating under Section 318 BNS where the amount is recovered and a formal settlement is reached, quashing on the grounds of settlement is a viable strategy. The Supreme Court laid down the applicable principles in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012, distinguishing cases where quashing would serve the ends of justice from those where it would not.
If You Are the Victim
- Screenshot every message, payment promise, and profile immediately — before the accused can delete accounts or block you further.
- File a complaint on cybercrime.gov.in with all supporting evidence attached. Note your complaint reference number carefully.
- Report the fraudster's social media accounts (Instagram, WhatsApp, etc.) to the respective platforms for fraud — this creates a parallel record and may result in account suspension.
- Do not confront the accused aggressively in writing or in person. Keep all communication factual and documented.
- Consult an advocate experienced in cyber fraud cases before sending any legal notice, so the notice is properly framed under the correct provisions.
Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Aadhaar card and PAN card (identity proof of complainant)
- Screenshots of all chats, messages, and calls with the accused (WhatsApp, Instagram DMs, SMS)
- Screenshot of the original agreement or promise to pay
- Screen recording or screenshot showing the account being suspended or blocked
- Proof of account ownership (the platform account details, registered email, phone number)
- Any bank transaction records, UPI screenshots, or wallet statements showing promised payments were not made
- Social media profile screenshots of the accused (name, profile picture, URL) before they block you
- Complaint acknowledgment number from cybercrime.gov.in
What Evidence Is Required?
- Digital conversation logs: Primary evidence. Screenshots and chat exports showing the accused's promise to pay and subsequent evasion.
- Account suspension notice: Email or in-app notification from the platform confirming the suspension — establishes the loss suffered.
- Proof of credential sharing: Any message where the complainant shared login details (establishes the act of entrustment).
- Call records: CDRs from the telecom provider showing repeated follow-up attempts by the victim.
- Social media block evidence: Screenshots demonstrating the accused blocked the victim after the fraud.
- Electronic device metadata: Where available, timestamps and IP logs can corroborate the timeline of events.
- Witness statements: Any third party who was aware of the arrangement can provide a supporting statement.
How the Police Behave in Such Cases
Make no mistake — police attitude toward low-value cyber fraud cases can be discouraging. Where the amount is small, some officers may informally suggest the matter isn't worth pursuing. Cyber crime cells, where they exist, are generally better equipped and more receptive than local police stations. Expect the investigation to move slowly unless pushed through formal written complaints to senior officers. Bringing a structured complaint, with all digital evidence pre-organised and clearly referenced to the applicable BNS and IT Act sections, significantly improves how your complaint is treated at the station level.
Timeline of Legal Process
- Day 1-7: File complaint on cybercrime.gov.in and at the cyber crime cell or local police station. Send formal legal notice.
- Week 2-4: Police acknowledge complaint; preliminary inquiry initiated. Advocate follows up with written reminders if no action.
- Month 1-2: FIR registered (if police act) or private complaint filed before Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS.
- Month 2-4: Police investigation — recording of statements, digital evidence collection, accused summoned.
- Month 4-6: Chargesheet filed before Magistrate. Court takes cognizance.
- Month 6-12: Charges framed, trial commences, evidence recorded.
- Year 1-3: Arguments heard, judgment delivered. Appeal, if any, before Sessions Court or High Court.
How Long Will the Investigation Take?
Realistically, cyber fraud investigations at the police level take anywhere from two to six months before a chargesheet is filed, depending on how promptly the digital evidence is seized and whether the accused cooperates with summons. Where the accused is in a different city, coordination between police jurisdictions can add further delay. Consistent follow-up by your advocate with the investigating officer materially speeds up the process. Cases with strong, pre-organised digital evidence move noticeably faster than those where evidence collection starts from scratch.
Understanding the Costs
The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.
A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India