Seeing policeman makes citizens feel nervous, not safe: Rajasthan High Court curbs ‘unbridled power’ of cops

It also noted that seeing a policeman makes a citizen feel more nervous than safe.

“We are living in a country where seeing a policeman makes a citizen feel more nervous than safe. This is a hard fact that all lawabiding citizens are terrorised by the very presence of policemen ‘not a generalised situation but by and large, it is a hard fact’ as the majority of them were not considered ideal by the people,” the court noted.

The court made the observations while highlighting instances of police registering cyber crime cases without any private complainant or victim and seeking information from banks, digital wallets, payment aggregators, and the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI).

“The entire investigation suggests that not a single person is named who was cheated by the petitioner accused, meaning thereby the police registered FIR and used power against banks, wallet operators, and payment aggregators to procure information,” it observed.

The court remarked that the police are not meant to exercise any power or authority over any of the stakeholders of the ecosystem of the country, or bully either a citizen or any entity.

While observing that some directions are necessary to protect harassment of innocent persons, the court passed a slew of directions.

Directions

• After receipt of any information about cyber crime either through a victim or through NCRP including 1930, the same shall be analysed and investigated as early as possible by a designated and trained police officer, not below the rank of ASI or SubInspector, subject to availability in police station.
• The DGP shall ensure that all such personnel who are involved in the process of investigating a matter relating to cyber crime are well trained within six months so that an innocent person may not be prosecuted in an ordinary and casual manner.
• As soon as information about the commission of a crime or suspicion of a crime is received and an FIR is registered, then before procuring any information from any bank or payment system operator (PSO or payment aggregator), a copy shall be forwarded to the Superintendent of Police and his approval be obtained expressly or orally.
• An entry to this effect be recorded in daily diary of police station as well in the case diary.
• As soon as any information is received about the transfer of money or transaction of crime proceed(s) in any bank account or by using any digital payment instrument, including UPI or a wallet, then information shall be sent immediately to the nodal officer of said bank of the beneficiary or payment service system, including the payment aggregator, so as to take action at their end.
• The information should accompany a copy of the FIR or information received by the police. The bank or the payment system operator (PSO) may decline a request, if it is received without a copy of any complaint or FIR.
• In no case, bank account operated by any financial entity, such as a Payment System operator (PSO), payment aggregator, or a merchant, be blocked or put on hold by any of the bank on the request of any police official for a suspicious transaction of any third party. This instruction shall not be applicable in cases of CBI or ED, including under the PMLA or under the PC Act.
• All banks and payment system operators, including payment aggregators and financial service providers, are stakeholders as per Guideline No. 7 prepared by the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre and are participants of CFCFRMS.
• Therefore, they shall appoint one nodal officer with whom the police may establish contact as and when any emergent situation arises.
• The duties of such officer shall be assigned in a manner that one of the officer is available to contact round the clock. The institution may also use its customer care support for this purpose.
• The police shall not request to any bank to block or put on hold any amount in bank account or escrow account maintained and operated by any payment System Operator (PSOs) including payment aggregator and payment wallet operator, or a merchant.
• If any bank puts on hold any bank account or escrow account maintained by any such entity on the request of the police, then the bank shall be personally liable for the Civil and Criminal consequences for the loss including financial and damage to the reputation of such PSO or merchant.
• As soon as any information is received about unauthorised transaction from any bank account or any digital transaction, the police may act immediately after informing the Superintendent of Police concerned and intimate the payment system operator (PSO), to mark lien on a specific amount (money allegedly transferred from bank account of victim).
• In no case the police may ask or request any bank or payment system operator (PSO) including payment aggregator, to block or suspend entire financial account of any individual, including any merchant.
• In case if any of the saving bank account is used frequently for transferring the crime proceed(s) or for fraudulent transactions, then the police may inform the concerned bank branch to provide details of said bank account operator including the transaction history along with location.
• If any credit card or debit card is used to purchase merchandise online money is transferred to the bank account of a merchant, including financial intermediary or any bank or payment system operator (PSO) including Payment aggregator, nor any amount be marked as lien, as the amount has been used and converted to a merchandise, thus the stolen property is not the money. A misuse of credit/debit card is a disputed transaction between bank and the customer.
• As soon as information to block or put on hold or marking of a lien is forwarded to a bank or any financial intermediary, including a payment system operator (PSO), then the information shall simultaneously be sent to the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate concerned within 24 hours.
• Failing to inform may render such action as void or actionable wrong against police. These guidelines shall not be applicable upon the blocking and marking a lien on mule accounts operated by individuals to transfer money or crime proceed(s).