Cybercrime and the Changing Citizen–Police Interface in India

Context

The Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2026, based on a survey of 8,306 citizens across 16 States, highlights rising cybercrime exposure and gaps in police redressal.

The report, published jointly by Lokniti–CSDS and Common Cause, examines the journey from cyber-fraud victimisation to police reporting and recovery of lost money.

Rising Cybercrime Amid Overall Crime Decline

NCRB data cited in the report shows that registered cybercrime cases increased by 17.9%, from 86,420 in 2023 to 1,01,928 in 2024, even as overall registered crime declined by around 6%. This indicates the growing importance of cyber-enabled offences within India’s changing crime landscape.

Widespread Exposure to Digital Fraud

Citizens are increasingly encountering sophisticated scams. About 33% reported fraudulent calls concerning unordered deliveries, while 31% encountered high-return investment schemes and 27% received calls from persons posing as bank officials seeking sensitive information.

Digital exposure also matters. Nearly 46% of high internet users reported moderate-to-high exposure to scams, compared with 19% among non-users.

Financial Impact and Unequal Vulnerability

Around 13% of respondents had experienced cybercrime during the previous two to three years. Among these victims, 54% suffered financial fraud, while nearly 23% lost more than ₹20,000.

Fraud is not confined to digitally inexperienced citizens. Affluent respondents and college graduates reported higher victimisation, reflecting the increasing sophistication of investment, banking and corporate frauds.

At the same time, poorer victims face additional institutional disadvantages. They were substantially more likely to depend on informal influence or pay bribes to advance their complaints.

Gaps in Police Redressal

Only 49% of cybercrime victims formally complained to the police, while 39% did not complain and another 9% discontinued the process after an initial visit.

A particularly serious finding concerns bribery: 27% of complainants reported paying a bribe. The report also found a significant difference in reported recovery rates between those who paid bribes and those who did not, raising concerns about unequal access to institutional justice.

This creates a situation where the ability to recover stolen money can become associated with informal influence rather than transparent and uniform procedures.

Structural Vulnerabilities

India’s rapid digitalisation has expanded opportunities for economic activity but has also increased the digital attack surface. Fraudsters exploit psychological manipulation through fake government officials, police impersonation, delivery-related scams, fraudulent investment opportunities and threats of arrest.

The problem therefore extends beyond individual carelessness. Citizens may possess digital access without having adequate awareness of social-engineering techniques or knowledge of available institutional remedies.

Existing Institutional Measures

The government has established several mechanisms to strengthen cybercrime response:

National Cybercrime Reporting Portal and 1930 helpline for reporting cyber offences and financial fraud.
Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS) to facilitate rapid intervention and freezing of fraudulent transactions.
Sanchar Saathi for addressing stolen mobile devices and fraudulent SIM connections.
Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) for coordination, intelligence sharing and capacity-building among law-enforcement agencies.

However, technological infrastructure needs to be matched by effective implementation at the police-station level.

Key Challenges

Under-reporting: Victims may avoid formal complaints because of procedural complexity, perceived lack of responsiveness or uncertainty about recovery.

Inter-state and cross-border fraud: Cybercriminal networks frequently operate across jurisdictions, requiring coordination between police forces, banks, telecom companies and digital platforms.

Limited local capacity: Many police stations require stronger cyber-forensic expertise, specialised personnel and digital investigation tools.

Corruption and informal gatekeeping: Bribery and dependence on personal connections can undermine equal access to justice, particularly for economically weaker victims.

Way Forward

Enable automatic Zero-FIR registration: Complaints submitted through the 1930/NCRP system should trigger streamlined registration and investigation without unnecessary discretionary barriers.
Strengthen rapid fund freezing: Banks, payment platforms and law-enforcement agencies should operate through standardised, time-bound protocols for freezing suspicious transactions.
Digitise complaint monitoring: End-to-end tracking can reduce discretionary intervention and allow citizens to monitor the progress of their cases.
Strengthen cyber-police capacity: Local police units need trained personnel, forensic infrastructure and access to modern digital investigation tools.
Expand cyber-literacy programmes: Awareness campaigns should focus not only on passwords and cybersecurity hygiene but also on recognising impersonation, investment fraud, courier scams and psychological manipulation.

Conclusion

SPIR 2026 shows that India’s cybercrime challenge is closely linked to both digital vulnerability and institutional accessibility. Strengthening transparent, technology-enabled and accountable policing is essential to ensure that digitalisation expands economic opportunity without creating unequal access to justice.

Source : The Hindu