The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs tabled its 254th Report on Cyber Crime – Ramifications, Protection and Prevention in August. The report takes stock of the rising scale and sophistication of cybercrime in India, noting how financial fraud, deepfakes, online harassment, and even cyber trafficking have become pressing threats.
It stresses that these crimes are no longer just isolated incidents of fraud or abuse but systemic risks that undermine economic stability, public trust, and national security. To respond, the committee has called for stronger laws, tighter enforcement, better victim support, and new regulatory frameworks tailored to emerging challenges.
Here are the key takeaways from the report:
Financial fraud is overwhelming India’s cyber landscape
Cyber financial crimes make up 85% of all cases reported on the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal, with losses crossing Rs 31,500 crore since 2019. UPI frauds, QR code scams, and SIM swaps dominate. The committee has called for real-time monitoring across banks, stricter KYC norms for SIM issuance, and simpler awareness campaigns so that users in smaller towns and rural areas can safeguard themselves.
Citizens are left without adequate support
The report underlines the psychological damage caused by cyberstalking, sextortion, deepfake exploitation, and bullying. Women and children are especially vulnerable, yet support systems remain weak. The committee recommends establishing integrated victim support centres offering counselling, legal assistance, and quicker takedowns of morphed content—with intermediaries required to act within 10 hours of complaints.
Cross-border scam factories are a growing concern
The committee notes that Indian youth are being trafficked to scam centres in Southeast Asia, where they are forced into crypto frauds and online extortion. Cryptocurrencies and mule accounts are central to laundering these proceeds. The panel has asked the government to strengthen cyber diplomacy, push for real-time data sharing treaties, and crack down on networks that exploit unemployed Indians through fake job offers.
Digital trust is weakening
Public confidence in India’s digital platforms is fraying. The elderly and small merchants are shifting back to cash, citing repeated UPI scams. Parents are reluctant to use online education services because of exposure to inappropriate or fake content. The committee recommends improving the 1930 cybercrime helpline and cybercrime.gov.in portal, holding banks accountable for delays in grievance redressal, and ensuring cybersecurity is built into every government digital service by design.
Emerging threats demand proactive regulation
Cybercrime is evolving into a service economy. “Cybercrime-as-a-Service” platforms now sell ransomware kits, phishing tools, and AI-powered deepfake generators to anyone willing to pay. Weak cloud configurations in hospitals and universities have led to data breaches, and 5G expansion has created more entry points for IoT-based attacks. The panel stresses the need for AI regulation to prevent misuse, regular cloud security audits, and the inclusion of digital ethics in education to prepare a cyber-aware workforce.
The big picture
The report frames cybercrime not as a narrow policing issue but as a systemic challenge with economic, social, and diplomatic dimensions. Its recommendations centre on faster victim support, tighter regulation of intermediaries, stronger international cooperation, and capacity building at home. Unless addressed, the panel warns, cybercrime could erode trust in India’s digital transformation itself.
Criticism of the report
The committee’s recommendations have not gone unchallenged. A note of dissent attached to the report warns that some measures could lead to regulatory overreach and curbs on free speech. Some opposition members have argued that the proposed powers for intermediaries and law enforcement to swiftly take down content, especially deepfakes and misinformation, may end up stifling legitimate expression and open debate online.
They pointed out that poorly defined terms leave too much discretion in the hands of authorities, which might be misused against political critics, journalists, or satirists. The dissenting MPs stressed that cybercrime prevention must not come at the cost of democratic freedoms.
These concerns are not abstract. A recent flashpoint was the controversy around the Sahyog portal, launched to coordinate takedown requests. Elon Musk-owned social media platform X has been objecting to the government’s directives via the Sahyog system, stating that the orders were excessive and lacked transparency.