Abuse Of The Cyber Cell Portal: A Growing Threat To Justice And Due Process
- IJLLR Journal
- 5 days ago
- 2 min read
Owaiz Ahmed Khan Shirani & Thridev Prince, B.Com LL.B., St, Joseph’s College of Law, Bangalore
ABSTRACT
The rapid digitalization of the Indian economy, characterized by the meteoric rise of the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) and the expansion of digital banking, has fundamentally altered the landscape of criminal activity. As financial transactions migrated to the digital sphere, so too did the mechanisms of fraud, prompting the Government of India to establish a robust defensive infrastructure. Central to this defensive posture is the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP), managed by the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs. While the portal was envisioned as a sanctuary for victims of digital predation, its operational implementation has increasingly diverged from the established tenets of due process and natural justice. The systemic prioritization of speed in fund recovery has inadvertently created a framework ripe for exploitation, where the state’s coercive powers, specifically the ability to freeze bank accounts, are being weaponized by individuals to settle personal vendettas, civil disputes, and matrimonial conflicts. The Cyber Cell Portal was established as a crucial mechanism to provide swift redressal for cyber-related offences and to enhance access to justice in the digital era. Designed to assist victims of online fraud, harassment, identity theft, and other cybercrimes, the portal aims to ensure efficiency, transparency, and timely intervention by law enforcement agencies. However, in recent years, the increasing misuse of the Cyber Cell Portal has emerged as a significant concern, posing a serious threat to justice and due process.
This paper critically examines how false, exaggerated, or malicious complaints are being filed through the portal to harass individuals, settle personal disputes, or exert undue pressure, often without adequate preliminary verification. Such abuse not only undermines the credibility of genuine cybercrime victims but also results in unwarranted investigations, reputational damage, and violation of fundamental rights of the accused, including the right to fair procedure and natural justice. The absence of stringent safeguards, accountability mechanisms, and penalties for false reporting further exacerbates the problem.
The study highlights the legal, social, and procedural consequences of this misuse and emphasizes the urgent need for reforms. It advocates for balanced safeguards that protect genuine complainants while preventing the weaponization of cyber law enforcement tools, thereby preserving the integrity of the justice system.
