Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal is the live story of cyber fraud in Mirzapur. It highlights the alarming rise of digital scams that have left many victims in distress. Meanwhile, the information seeker is diligently working to fix accountability through the RTI application. In their quest, they are seeking justice and transparency in a system often plagued by negligence. As the investigation unfolds, it becomes increasingly clear that cybercriminals are becoming more sophisticated. Consequently, they are targeting unwary citizens and exploiting loopholes in digital security. This narrative not only sheds light on the plight of those affected, but also emphasizes the crucial importance of awareness and preventive measures. Ultimately, the pursuit of justice in Mirzapur represents a critical step towards safeguarding individuals from such deceitful practices in the future.
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 that the police fail to convert a verified financial theft complaint into a First Information Report (FIR).
By keeping the matter in the “inquiry” stage rather than moving it to the “investigation” stage, they effectively stall the legal process.
2. Procedural “Passing the Buck”
The case highlights a common bureaucratic hurdle where local police stations (Vindhyachal) transfer matters to specialized units (Cyber Cell); however, this process often occurs without formalizing the complaint. Consequently, this creates a jurisdictional loop that ultimately 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) introduces new rules for “Preliminary Inquiries.” However, the key concern is that local authorities might misuse these new provisions to delay the mandatory registration of cognizable offenses.
4. RTI as a Tool for Accountability
Activists like Yogi M.P. Singh effectively use the Right to Information Act 2005 to compel the police to provide a written response. Specifically, this act compels the department to not only name responsible officers but also to provide a comprehensive paper trail explaining why the police have not filed an FIR.
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, unfortunately, reveals a disconnect.
Specifically, a portal marking a case as “Disposed” does not always signify that the victim’s problem has been adequately resolved.
Rather, it often indicates that a report has merely been 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? Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal
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 unfortunately lost ₹20,000 to cyber criminals, serves as a poignant example of the procedural friction that exists between citizens and the law enforcement machinery.
Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal: 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. Unfortunately, in a tragic incident of cyber fraud, someone skillfully siphoned ₹20,000 from his account. For a resident of a village like Gorsar Sarpati, this amount not only represents significant savings but also often reflects 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.
Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal: 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) does the law conduct an investigation if no FIR is filed?
- Jurisdictional Transfer: On what legal grounds did the authorities subsequently transfer the case 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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
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 must register an FIR when the information discloses a cognizable offense.
With the implementation of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), authorities have formalized the rules regarding “Preliminary Enquiry.” Section 173(3) of the BNSS provides a 14-day window for a preliminary inquiry in specific cases to determine if a prima facie case exists. However, the complainant 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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
The Public Information Officer (PIO), Om Prakash Singh (ASP Operations), responded by indicating that on April 7, 2025, they “Disposed Of” the request. Subsequently, the police submitted reports from the Vindhyachal Police Station and the Cyber Crime Cell.
However, the core frustration remains: The Transfer Loop. Sub-Inspector Vinod Kumar Yadav of the Vindhyachal station subsequently transferred the victim’s grievance to the Cyber Cell. Unfortunately, without an FIR, the Cyber Cell often lacks the full legal authority to freeze accounts or demand immediate data from intermediaries. Consequently, this leads to a “wait and watch” game that ultimately benefits the fraudsters.
Statistical Silence and Local Accountability (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
| 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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
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. (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal) That same demand for transparency exposed the state’s top office too: the DGP office provided misleading information to Mahima Maurya in a related RTI case.
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, in fact, the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP). (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
- 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: (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
- 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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
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 (Cyber Fraud & SHO Vindhyachal)
- Vindhyachal Police Station:
- Phone: 05442-281220
- Email: sbi.15131@sbi.co.in (Note: Furthermore, this email was provided in your text as a bank/station link; however, it is important to note that police station emails typically follow the
ps[stationname].mi-up@gov.informat).
Would you like me to assist you in drafting the First Appeal to the Senior Superintendent of Police, subsequently challenging the “arbitrary report” referenced 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.