Here are the key takeaways:
from the blog post regarding the cyber fraud case of Pramod Kumar Kushwaha:
1. The Crisis of “Non-Registration” (Burking)
The central issue is the police’s failure to convert a verified financial theft complaint into a First Information Report (FIR). By keeping the matter in the “inquiry” stage rather than “investigation” stage, the legal process is effectively stalled.
2. Procedural “Passing the Buck”
The case highlights a common bureaucratic hurdle where local police stations (Vindhyachal) transfer matters to specialized units (Cyber Cell) without formalizing the complaint. This creates a jurisdictional loop that leaves the victim without a clear point of accountability.
3. Legal Transition Friction
The shift from the CrPC to the BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) has introduced new rules for “Preliminary Inquiries.” The takeaway here is the concern that these new provisions might be misused by local authorities to delay the mandatory registration of cognizable offenses.
4. RTI as a Tool for Accountability
The use of the Right to Information Act 2005 by activists like Yogi M.P. Singh remains the most effective way to force a written response from the police. It forces the department to name responsible officers and provide a paper trail for why an FIR has or has not been filed.
5. Discrepancy in Grievance Redressal
Despite high-level complaints filed through the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) and the UP Government portals, the ground-level execution in Mirzapur shows a disconnect. A “Disposed” status on a portal does not always mean the victim’s problem has been solved; often, it just means a report was filed.
6. The Economic Impact on Rural Victims
For a rural resident, a loss of ₹20,000 is a major financial blow. The systemic delay in justice not only protects the fraudster but also discourages rural citizens from participating in the digital economy due to a lack of security and institutional support.
Justice Delayed? The Struggle for Accountability in Mirzapur’s Cyber Fraud Cases
In an era where India is rapidly transitioning toward a “Digital India,” the dark underbelly of cyberspace continues to haunt rural and semi-urban populations. A recent Right to Information (RTI) battle in District Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, has shed light on the systemic hurdles victims face when seeking justice for digital theft.
The case of Pramod Kumar Kushwaha, a resident of Godasar Sarpati, who lost ₹20,000 to cyber criminals, serves as a poignant example of the procedural friction between citizens and the law enforcement machinery.
The Core Incident: A Digital Blow to a Rural Household
Pramod Kumar Kushwaha, son of Rambali, holds a savings account at the State Bank of India (SBI), Chhanbey (Vijaypur) branch. In an unfortunate incident of cyber fraud, ₹20,000 was siphoned from his account. For a resident of a village like Gorsar Sarpati, this amount represents significant savings, often the result of months of hard labor.
Despite providing comprehensive banking details—including CIF numbers, branch codes, and transaction records—to the authorities, the path to recovery and legal redress proved to be anything but straightforward.
The RTI Intervention: Demanding Transparency
When initial complaints failed to yield a First Information Report (FIR), social activist Yogi M. P. Singh intervened by filing an RTI application (Registration No: SPMZR/R/2025/60058) directed at the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur.
The RTI sought to pierce the veil of administrative silence by asking five critical questions:
- Accountability: Who was the officer who accepted the “arbitrary” inquiry report that led to the grievance being closed?
- FIR Status: Has an FIR actually been registered? If not, why?
- Legal Framework: Under which section of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)—the law that recently replaced the CrPC—is an investigation conducted if no FIR is filed?
- Jurisdictional Transfer: On what legal grounds was the case transferred from the Vindhyachal Police Station to the Cyber Cell without a formal FIR?
- Statistical Data: A request for the total number of cyber fraud cases registered by the Vindhyachal SHO over the last three financial years.
The Legal Conflict: CrPC vs. BNSS
A major point of contention in this case is the procedural validity of “preliminary inquiries.” Under the Indian legal system, specifically following the landmark Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P. judgment, the police are mandated to register an FIR if the information discloses a cognizable offense.
With the implementation of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the rules regarding “Preliminary Enquiry” have been formalized. Section 173(3) of the BNSS allows a 14-day window for a preliminary inquiry in specific cases to determine if a prima facie case exists. However, the complainant in this case alleges that the police are using these procedural windows to avoid registering FIRs altogether, effectively stalling the investigation.
The “Arbitrary Report” and the Police Response
The response from the Public Information Officer (PIO), Om Prakash Singh (ASP Operations), indicates that the request was “Disposed Of” on April 7, 2025. The police provided reports from the Vindhyachal Police Station and the Cyber Crime Cell.
However, the core frustration remains: The Transfer Loop. The victim’s grievance was transferred from Sub-Inspector Vinod Kumar Yadav of the Vindhyachal station to the Cyber Cell. Without an FIR, the Cyber Cell often lacks the full legal teeth to freeze accounts or demand immediate data from intermediaries, leading to a “wait and watch” game that benefits the fraudsters.
Statistical Silence and Local Accountability
The RTI also sought data on cyber fraud registrations from 2022 to 2025. This is a crucial metric. If the number of registered FIRs is significantly lower than the number of complaints received (as suggested by the PMO and UP Government grievance portals mentioned in the application), it points to a “Burking” of crime—a practice where police do not register crimes to keep official crime statistics low.
Table: Key Details of the Grievance
| Reference Number | Department | Status |
| PMOPG/E/2025/0018733 | Prime Minister’s Office | Filed 09/02/2025 |
| GOVUP/E/2025/0020726 | Govt. of Uttar Pradesh | Filed 03/03/2025 |
| SPMZR/R/2025/60058 | SP Mirzapur (RTI) | Disposed 07/04/2025 |
Conclusion: The Road Ahead for Cyber Victims
The case of Pramod Kumar Kushwaha is not just about ₹20,000; it is about the Rule of Law. When the police hesitate to register an FIR in a clear case of digital theft, it emboldens criminals and erodes public trust in the digital banking ecosystem.
The transition from CrPC to BNSS was intended to streamline justice, but as this RTI highlights, the ground reality in districts like Mirzapur requires stricter oversight. For the residents of Godasar Sarpati, justice shouldn’t be a complex maze of branch codes and jurisdictional transfers—it should be a transparent process that starts with the simple act of acknowledging a crime.
Based on the context of the case and the official details for the public authorities in Mirzapur, here are the contact and application details for further follow-up.
1. Principal Public Authority (District Mirzapur)
The primary office responsible for investigating the fraud and overseeing the local police stations is the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP).
- Public Authority Name: Office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur
- Official Website: uppolice.gov.in (Mirzapur Unit)
- Email: spmzr-up@nic.in1
- SSP Office Phone: 05442-2525782
- CUG (Mobile): 94544002993
2. Public Information Officer (PIO) Details
As per the RTI response (SPMZR/R/2025/60058), the following officer disposed of the request:
- Name: Om Prakash Singh
- Designation: Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP) Operations
- Mobile: 9125608556
- Email: aspopmzp@gmail.com / addlspopmzr@gmail.com
3. Cyber Crime Special Unit
Since the matter was transferred to the Cyber Cell, you may contact the specialized unit at the state or district level:
- District Cyber Cell: Office of SSP Mirzapur
- State Cyber HQ (Lucknow): sp-cyber.lu@up.gov.in4
- Helpline Number: 1930 (National Cyber Crime Helpline)5
- Web Portal: [suspicious link removed]
4. Grievance & RTI Portals
To track the existing grievances or file a First Appeal under the RTI Act, use the following links:
- UP IGRS (Jansunwai):jansunwai.up.nic.in
- Reference ID for PMO: PMOPG/E/2025/0018733
- Reference ID for UP Govt: GOVUP/E/2025/0020726
- RTI Online (UP):rtionline.up.gov.in
- RTI Registration Number: SPMZR/R/2025/60058
Relevant Police Station Details
- Vindhyachal Police Station:
- Phone: 05442-281220
- Email: sbi.15131@sbi.co.in (Note: This email was provided in your text as a bank/station link, but usually, police station emails follow the
ps[stationname].mi-up@gov.informat).
Would you like me to help you draft the First Appeal to the Senior Superintendent of Police, challenging the “arbitrary report” mentioned in the RTI disposal?
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.