The Gujarat High Court has sharply criticised the police investigation into an Ahmedabad cybercrime case involving ₹78.99 lakh, questioning the alleged arrest of a man despite the absence of evidence linking money from the offence to his bank account.
The court was hearing a petition filed by the accused man, who sought quashing of the criminal proceedings against him. According to the report, the petitioner alleged that police had implicated him without evidence, assaulted him and pressured him to confess.
Justice Hasmukh Suthar questioned the investigating police officer about the basis for making the petitioner an accused. The court asked the police to explain through an affidavit what evidence had been used to connect the man to the case.
The court also questioned the reported decision to apprehend the brother or family member of an alleged offender when the main accused could not be found. “If an accused is not within your reach, can you make his brother or family member an accused?” the court was quoted as asking.
The judge further criticised the police for allegedly failing to establish a financial link. The court noted that money connected with the cybercrime had not been deposited into the petitioner’s bank account and questioned how an arrest could be justified in those circumstances.
The court was also quoted as saying that police power could not be used to punish innocent people. It expressed the view that the first information report appeared to have been designed to protect the actual offenders, although the report did not provide the full contents of the FIR or the investigation record.
The police inspector’s defence, presented on behalf of the state, reportedly drew further criticism from the court. Justice Suthar questioned whether the officer possessed a basic understanding of cybercrime investigation and warned that legal action could follow if the police failed to provide a satisfactory explanation.
The proceedings highlight the evidentiary challenges involved in cybercrime investigations, where bank transfers, digital records and the identification of the actual beneficiary are central to establishing a suspect’s role. The court’s questions, as reported, focused on whether those links had been demonstrated before the petitioner was treated as an accused.
The immediate next step is the police response through the affidavit sought by the High Court. The court indicated that further action would depend on the explanation provided by the investigating authorities.
