Karnataka High Court: In a pending writ petition filed by the petitioners seeking issuance of mandamus for constitution of a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’) to conduct, supervise and monitor investigation in a crime registered for offences punishable under Sections 66, 66(B) and 66(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (‘IT Act’) and Sections 318(2), 318(3), and 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’), a Single-Judge Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., issued a continuing mandamus, ensuring the implementation of its earlier order regarding the establishment of a Cyber Command Centre (‘CCC’). The Court held that the CCC is not an option, but an imperative born of necessity and directed the State to make the centre robust and insulated from external intrusions, including frequent transfers of its officers. The Court also directed the integration of the 1930 helpline and all CEN police stations into the CCC’s framework to tackle the burgeoning menace of cybercrime.
Background
The writ petition was filed by petitioner against the respondents. The Court had previously passed an order on 25-04-2025, allowing the writ petition and directing a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’) to reinvestigate the alleged crime. The SIT was to be headed by Director General of Police and include two other IPS officers. The Court also issued a mandamus to the State Government to hand over the investigation to the SIT. This order was subsequently amended on 02-05-2025 to replace one of the IPS officers by the Superintendent of Police, CID.
The earlier order also included a direction to the State to take steps towards creating a Cyber Command Centre (‘CCC’), as envisioned in the order. The Court had noted that the State must recognize the existential threat of cybercrime and evolve, otherwise, justice for victims would become a mirage. The Court observed that establishing a CCC, to be headed by an officer of the rank of DGP, would usher in a new beginning for tackling new-age crimes. This direction was deemed imperative to prevent justice from becoming a mirage for victims of cybercrime and cyber frauds. The earlier order was challenged before the Apex Court, which declined to interfere with the order and its observations. As a result, the Court kept the matter pending for the issuance of a continuing mandamus.
Analysis and Decision
The Court noted that the State had issued a Government Order dated 02-09-2025 in furtherance of the earlier order. The new Government Order effectively brought into being the CCC, separating it from the CID department and placing it under the jurisdiction of a Director General, Cyber Command. But mere establishment would not be enough. If it remains inert, it will only become a paper implementation, in the face of growing menace of cybercrimes. The Court observed that,
“This CCC should not be a mere edifice of bureaucracy, but a paradigm shift, a beacon heralding a new dawn in the fight against cybercrime. Giving it teeth in its true perspective would be making the CCC emerge as new age antidote, to meet the new age crimes. Therefore, it must be robustly fortified.”
The Court further observed that for CCC to remain stable and transparent, it has to be insulated from external intrusion, and its officers must serve with continuity with disruptions. The officers of the CCC, particularly the person who heads the CCC, the Director General of Police, must not be transferred, except owing to exceptional circumstances, so that the functioning of the CCC should not remain illusory. The head of the CCC and his team working in the CCC must not be overnight de-positioned, without the consultation of the head of the CCC and any investigation by the CCC underway, should not be thwarted by repeated change of officers.
The Court directed the Director General of Police of CCC to submit his report showing progress in the investigation of cybercrimes or integration of all information and technology cases to be done under one roof i.e., CCC. The Court also directed the integration of the 1930 helpline within the framework of the CCC. The Court observed that the helpline currently operates without a crime being registered, with officers marking a lien or freezing bank accounts without a document in case of cyber fraud of in relation to money. The Court, therefore, deemed it necessary for the helpline’s conversations to be recorded as part of the police/information technology system and to draw up a zero FIR against each of them.
The Court noted the existing discrepancy where jurisdictional police stations, which are ill-equipped to investigate cybercrimes, have a higher number of registered cybercrime cases than the dedicated Cyber CEN Police Stations. To address this, the Court emphasized the need for an integrated system where every cybercrime is brought under the umbrella of the Command Centre. The State is expected to make the CCC robust, people-friendly, deft and ironhanded to handle cybercrimes.
The Court noted that the burgeoning scourge in statistics of cybercrime is a chilling reminder of the exponential growth of cybercrime. Therefore, the CCC is not an option, but an imperative born of necessity.
The Court being satisfied with the establishment and progress of CCC listed the matter for further hearing on 24-09-2025.
[Newspace Research and Technologies Private Limited v. State of Karnataka, 2025 SCC OnLine Kar 18864, decided on 10-09-2025]
Amicus Curiae: B.N. Jagadeesh
