LawLoveLegal

A New Face of Cybercrime: Digital Arrest Through Fear and Impersonation In a disturbing instance of cyber-enabled fraud, a Delhi-based doctor couple was allegedly kept under what investigators describe as “digital arrest” for over two weeks and duped of nearly ₹14.85 crore by fraudsters impersonating officials from law enforcement agencies. The case exposes how fear of arrest, misuse of national security rhetoric, and impersonation of authorities are being deployed to psychologically restrain victims and extract large sums of money without physical confinement. Timeline of the Alleged Fraud According to Delhi Police, the fraud occurred between December 24 and January 9 , during which the accused maintained continuous contact with the victims through phone and video calls. An e-FIR was registered on Saturday , and the Cyber Crime Unit of Delhi Police has launched a full-scale investigation to trace the bank accounts and individuals involved. How the ‘Digital Arrest’ Began Victim In...

Supreme Court Reasserts Victim-Centric Approach in POCSO Bail Jurisprudence The Supreme Court has once again underscored that victim safety and the integrity of the trial process must override all other considerations while deciding bail under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) . In a significant judgment delivered on Friday, the Court cancelled the bail granted to an accused in a 2024 gangrape case involving a minor, holding that the Allahabad High Court’s order suffered from “manifest perversity” . The ruling reinforces the heightened statutory rigour applicable to sexual offences against children and clarifies that prolonged incarceration or delay in trial cannot be mechanically invoked to grant bail in grave POCSO offences . Factual Background of the Case The case arises from an alleged gangrape of a 16-year-old girl in Shamli district, Uttar Pradesh , on December 1, 2024 . An FIR was registered the following day at the Shamli police station. Acc...

Case Background — Alleged Murder and Accused Family Member The case concerns the alleged murder of Nikki Bhati , in which the victim’s brother-in-law was named as one of the accused persons. The prosecution narrative links the accused to the circumstances surrounding the alleged homicide, placing him within the circle of suspected involvement in the crime. The proceedings before the Allahabad High Court deal specifically with the question of whether the accused brother-in-law should be granted bail during trial . Earlier Bail Rejection — Court Found “No Sufficient Ground” On December 5 , the Allahabad High Court rejected the first bail application of the accused brother-in-law. In its earlier order, the Court observed that there were not sufficient grounds at that stage to justify release on bail. The rejection was based on: seriousness of allegations gravity of offence nature of material on record at the time of hearing The Court had accepted the prosecution’s submission that granti...

Case Background — May 19, 2024 Crash at Kalyani Nagar The case arises from the May 19, 2024 incident in Pune, where a Porsche car allegedly driven by a 17-year-old under the influence of alcohol rammed into a motorcycle near Kalyani Nagar on Airport Road shortly after 2 a.m., resulting in the death of two bike riders — Anis Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta. The accused juveniles were returning from a late-night party along with friends when the fatal crash occurred. The incident triggered widespread public outcry due to allegations of attempts to shield the juveniles and manipulate forensic evidence. Supreme Court Proceedings — Notice Issued on Bail Pleas The Supreme Court bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice to the State of Maharashtra on the bail petitions filed by two of the accused after the Bombay High Court rejected their bail pleas on December 16. The Court directed the matter to be listed for hearing on January 30, while calling for the State’s response. Th...

Supreme Court’s Landmark Observation On Wednesday, the Supreme Court upheld a Delhi High Court order directing the registration of criminal cases against former Delhi Police Commissioner Neeraj Kumar and officer Vinay Kumar Pandey . The apex court emphasized that “those who investigate should also be investigated to ensure the common man’s faith in the system is kept alive.” A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale dismissed the appeals filed by both officers, confirming the Delhi HC’s earlier decisions of 2006 and 2019. Allegations Against the Officers The case dates back to the late 1990s and early 2000s when Neeraj Kumar was deputed to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as its joint director. Pandey, later an Assistant Commissioner of Police, was serving as a CBI inspector at the time. Complainant Sheesh Ram Saini alleged he was coerced into signing documents in a corruption case involving former ED deputy director Ashok Agarwal. Complainant Vij...