Cyber law matters before the Punjab & Haryana High Court and the district courts and authorities of Punjab and Haryana — online financial fraud, identity theft, cyber harassment and stalking, defamation, misuse of personal images, and defence in proceedings under the Information Technology Act.
Cyber offences differ from most other crimes in one respect that matters more than any other: the first hours decide what can be recovered.
Money moved out of an account is transferred onward within minutes, withdrawn, and dispersed across accounts in several states. An image once circulated cannot be recalled by any order. Evidence sitting on a platform’s servers is retained for a limited period and then it is gone.
Almost every question a client asks us about a cyber matter has a better answer if it is asked on the first day rather than the second week.
This is not legal advice you need to pay for. It is what you should do immediately, and it is time-critical:
Reporting quickly can allow the funds to be frozen while they are still traceable. It also matters for a second reason that many people are unaware of: under the Reserve Bank’s framework on unauthorised electronic banking transactions, a customer’s liability depends substantially on how quickly the transaction was reported. Where the fault lies with the bank or the system, and where the customer reports promptly, liability may be nil.
Banks do not always volunteer this. Where a claim has been rejected, that rejection can be challenged.
The pattern is consistent even as the pretext changes: a call about a KYC update, a fake customer care number found through a search engine, a screen-sharing application installed at someone’s request, a fraudulent investment or trading platform, a job offer requiring a deposit, an OTP given to a caller claiming to be from the bank.
What we do depends on what stage the matter has reached. Where the money has just moved, the priority is reporting and freezing. Where it has not been recovered, the remedies run in parallel:
Criminal. Complaint and follow-up with the cyber cell, and pressing the investigation where it has stalled — which, with a complaint filed and forgotten, it frequently does.
Against the bank. Where the bank’s systems or procedures were at fault, or where a report was made promptly and ignored, proceedings before the Banking Ombudsman or a Consumer Commission for the loss.
Compensation under the IT Act. Where damage has been caused by unauthorised access to a computer resource, a claim for compensation lies before the Adjudicating Officer appointed under the Act. This route is significantly under-used and is frequently the more direct one.
Persistent messaging after being asked to stop, fake profiles created in someone’s name, sustained abuse across platforms, monitoring of a person’s movements or communications.
These are offences, and they are also facts that matter in other proceedings — a matrimonial case, a custody dispute, an application for protection. Evidence gathered properly serves both purposes; evidence gathered carelessly serves neither.
What matters is preservation. Screenshots alone are weak. Original messages retained on the device, platform records obtained through proper process, and a clear account of dates and sequence are what make a case rather than a complaint.
Where private images have been shared without consent, or where someone is being threatened with the publication of images or recordings, the law provides remedies and they can be moved quickly.
Two things are worth saying plainly to anyone in this position.
Paying does not end it. In our experience and in the experience of every investigating agency, payment is followed by a further demand.
You have not done anything that prevents you from getting help. People delay reporting out of embarrassment, and the delay is what makes the matter harder. Reporting can be done confidentially, and content can be sought to be taken down through the platform and through orders of the court.
We act in these matters with the discretion they require. Nothing is discussed with anyone outside the engagement.
False statements published online — on a review site, a social platform, a messaging group — may found both civil and criminal proceedings, and an injunction may be sought restraining further publication and requiring removal.
Whether to proceed is a judgement rather than a formality. Litigation draws attention to the statement complained of, and for a small matter that is sometimes the greater harm. We will give you a view on that before you commit to it.
We also act for persons accused. Cyber complaints are made carelessly as well as maliciously: an account accessed by a family member, a device shared between people, a business dispute recast as data theft, an allegation arising from a message sent years earlier in a different context.
Attribution is the weak point in a great many such cases. An IP address is not a person, and a device is not always used by its owner. What the record actually establishes is frequently much less than what the complaint asserts.
Electronic evidence is subject to specific requirements of admissibility, and a case built on material that will not be admitted is not a case at all.
That is a technical point with a practical consequence: how the material is collected, at what stage a certificate is obtained, and whether the original device remains available all matter, and all of them are decided early — usually before anyone has thought to take advice.
The acknowledgement of any complaint already made, bank statements and transaction alerts, the messages or emails themselves rather than screenshots where the originals still exist, the numbers and accounts involved, and a written sequence of what happened and when.
Bring it early. In cyber matters more than any other, the remedy available on day one is not the remedy available on day thirty.
Vaqeelsaab — Advocates. Practising before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and the district courts of Punjab and Haryana.
+91 94160 09800 | info@vaqeelsaab.com