CBI, ED, police don't arrest people through video calls: Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre
New Delhi (PTI): The CBI, police, customs, ED or judges do not arrest people through video calls, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) said in a public advisory issued in view of the rising cases of 'digital arrest' crimes in the country.
Terming it a scam, the federal cyber security agency cautioned people against falling victim to such crimes committed using the Internet.
"Don't Panic, Stay Alert. CBI/Police/Custom/ED/Judges DO NOT arrest you on video call," stated the advisory issued on Saturday.
The advisory depicted the logos of social media platforms like WhatsApp and Skype to showcase that calls for such scams are made using such platforms.
These social media platforms have said in the past that they are coordinating with cyber security agencies of the government to provide users enhanced safety against such crimes.
The I4C urged people to report such crimes at the central helpline number 1930 or the website -- www.cybercrime.gov.in.
Digital arrest is the name given to a cyber crime technique where fraudsters send an SMS or make video calls to a person posing as law enforcement agency officials fraudulently claiming that the individual or his close family members have been caught by a government investigative agency in a criminal activity like drugs trafficking or money laundering.
The cyber criminal subsequently confines the person to their premises by asking them to keep their mobile phone cameras on as part of a 'digital arrest' and then seek money through online transfer to bail the victim out of this situation.
A good number of these new-age cyber crimes are virtually reported every day from various parts of the country.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
BCI urges CJI to take action against Andhra HC judge for sending young lawyer to 24-hour custody
New Delhi (PTI): The Bar Council of India on Wednesday sought the urgent intervention of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant following a "deeply disturbing" incident where a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reportedly sent a young advocate to
24-hour judicial custody over a procedural lapse.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson and senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, in a formal representation, termed the conduct of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao "grossly inappropriate" and "damaging to the confidence of the Bar".
“I most respectfully request your Lordship to kindly take immediate institutional cognizance of the matter and call for the video recording of the proceedings, the order passed, and the surrounding circumstances.
“I further request that appropriate administrative action may kindly be considered, including withdrawal of judicial work from the learned Judge pending review, his immediate transfer to some far off High Court, and his nomination for appropriate judicial training/orientation on court management, judicial temperament, Bar-Bench relations, and proportional exercise of contempt/judicial authority,” Mishra wrote.
This representation is made to preserve the “dignity, moral authority and public confidence of the judiciary”, he said, adding, “Judges command the highest respect not by fear, but by fairness, patience, restraint and constitutional humility”.
The communication urged the CJI to intervene at the earliest to ensure that the faith of Bar, particularly young advocates, in the protective and corrective role of the judiciary is restored.
The controversy stems from proceedings on May 5.
According to the BCI, a video circulating online shows Justice Rao rebuking a young advocate who was unable to produce a specific order copy during a hearing.
The letter said that despite the advocate "repeatedly seeking pardon and mercy" and claiming he was in physical pain, the judge remained "unmoved".
The judge allegedly told the lawyer, "now you will learn," and mocked his experience before directing the Registrar and police personnel to take him into custody for 24 hours.
The BCI chairperson said that the judge’s actions lacked proportionality and fairness.
"The dignity of the court is not enhanced when a lawyer is made to beg for grace in open court and is still sent to custody for a procedural lapse," the letter said.
"A young lawyer... is an officer of the Court, still learning, still growing, and entitled to correction without humiliation," it added.
The bar body said that such actions create a "chilling effect" on the legal fraternity, particularly among junior members, and undermine the mutual respect required between the Bench and the Bar.
