Delhi Police: Two arrested, digital-arrest money trail probed

Delhi Police have arrested two men for allegedly operating a bank account used to route money linked to a Rs 2.10 crore “digital arrest” fraud, IANS reported on 25 October through Punjab Kesari. Police said the suspected mule account received Rs 98,592 connected to the case, rather than the full amount reported lost by the complainant.

The North-East District’s Cyber Police Station arrested Sonu Khan and Arjun Chaudhary, according to the IANS report. Police said they recovered four mobile phones, six debit cards and 10 chequebooks from the two men.

The arrests concern the alleged handling of fraud proceeds. Rediff reported that police were still investigating the money trail and the roles of the accused; its account did not identify either man as the person who impersonated an official or contacted the complainant.

A bank transaction led investigators to the account

According to police statements reported by IANS, investigators identified the account while scrutinising complaints registered on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. They shortlisted a complaint for verification and found that the suspected mule account in Yamuna Vihar had received Rs 98,592 on 12 October.

A mule account, in the arrangement police described, is a bank account used to receive and move money obtained through another person’s alleged fraud. The account transaction was the link investigators followed in this case.

IANS reported that examination of the transactions showed a withdrawal of Rs 49,000 on 12 October. Police said the remaining amount was withdrawn through a cheque. The report did not identify who made those withdrawals.

Investigators linked the transaction to an electronic first information report, the initial police record of an alleged offence, registered on 15 October 2026 by the Special Cell’s Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations unit, according to IANS.

That case followed a complainant’s report of being cheated of approximately Rs 2.10 crore in a digital-arrest scam, IANS reported. Neither its account nor Rediff’s report set out the full sequence of payments making up that alleged loss.

Rediff reported that police traced Khan to a shop selling disposable items in Ashok Nagar on 23 October. According to IANS, police recovered three mobile phones, six debit cards belonging to different banks and 10 chequebooks from his possession.

Police said Khan told investigators during questioning that Chaudhary had helped establish the shop, according to both reports. Rediff further reported the police account that Chaudhary had obtained control over Khan’s bank accounts in exchange for financial assistance. These are statements attributed to police about the interrogation, not findings by a court.

Chaudhary was subsequently apprehended, and police recovered one mobile phone from him, Rediff reported. Neither publication’s account includes a response from the accused or their lawyers, or details of a court decision on custody or bail.

What the digital-arrest label describes

The Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, or I4C, explains in its advisory dated 6 March 2025 that “digital arrest” is a method of intimidation used by fraudsters, not a form of arrest recognised under Indian law.

The advisory describes criminals impersonating police officers or representatives of agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation, Reserve Bank of India and Enforcement Directorate. They may use spoofed telephone numbers, which disguise the apparent origin of a call.

According to I4C, the callers then accuse the target of involvement in illegal activities. Their stories can involve a parcel supposedly containing contraband, misuse of identity details or an allegation that illicit money has entered the person’s bank account.

The advisory says some victims are pressured to remain on video calls through services such as Skype or WhatsApp until the criminals’ demands are met. Fraudsters may create a false police-station setting to make the impersonation appear credible.

I4C says the demand for money follows the threat: criminals seek payment to supposedly settle the matter or prevent action over a fabricated legal case. Its description explains the scam category, but does not establish which of these tactics was used against the complainant in the Delhi investigation.

The same advisory identifies the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal and the 1930 helpline as channels for reporting cyber fraud. In this investigation, police attributed the account lead to scrutiny of complaints already registered on that portal, according to IANS.

The reported seizures are of phones and banking materials; neither IANS nor Rediff reported a recovery of the complainant’s money. Rediff reported that the investigation remained underway to establish where the funds went and determine each accused person’s role.