Wednesday, July 8, 2026
Latest:
2026BankingLatestLegalTechnology

Adjudicating Officer holds Bank & Telecom Liable for SIM-Swap Online Fraud

legaldeli

Order dated 16.6.2026 of the Adjudicating Officer in Complaint No.59 of 2014 of Ajaz Lal Attar Vs.  ICICI Bank Ltd and others

Adjudicating Officer of IT Act – SIM-Swap Fraud – Dual Liabity of Bank & Telecom Provider

Adjudicating Officer holds Bank & Telecom Liable for SIM-Swap Online Fraud

Adjudicating Officer Order – Salary Savings Account hacked after fraudster procured duplicate SIM card from franchise out let of telecom provider without verification and in violation of DoT’s non-negotiable KYC norms.

Duplicate SIM Card used by the fraudster for unauthorized online transactions – Non-Compliance of KYC shall trigger liability

Auxiliary liability – even delayed remittance or re-credited funds to the bank account shall invite interest liability.

SIM Swap Frauds for Cyber Transfer – Liability of Banks & Telecom Operator / Provider including Franchise Outlet are accountable.

Consumer Protection in Digital Banking – Order of Adjudicating Officer

The complainant had salary savings account with ICICI bank.  On 25.6.2013, the registered SIM was abruptly disconnected and terminated from the cellular network.  Thereafter, an unknown fraudster procured a cloned duplicate SIM card mapping the complainant’s identity from an SR Cell franchise outlet and executed unauthorized online transfer.

The finding is very important that verification at the franchise out let was not done before issuing SIM card to fraudster.  The telecom provider, not only violated the non-negotiable KYC guidelines of the Department of Telecommunications and permitted the franchise outlet to issue duplicate SIM card without validating the credentials.

The complaint under Sections 43, 43(A), 66, 61 and 72A read with Sections 85 and 46 of the IT Act in respect of cyber fraud incident and claims for total compensation / damages of Rs.7,00,000/- with interest, legal and incidental expenses.

The  amount was re-credited to the account of the complainant during the pendency of proceedings.

However, the respondent Nos.3 and 3A caused unjustifiable delay in remitting the tracked funds from the interim order dated 9.5.2022 to 17.5.2024.  Therefore, they cannot be fully absolved from the auxiliary liability.

It was HELD that the respondent nos.3 and 3A shall pay 12% annual interest on the blocked amount.  The respondent no.2 Idea is also directed to pay damages of Rs.1 lakh on account of structural negligence, deficient internal controls and failure to controvert the allegations of an unauthorized SIM swap leading to the financial loss, mental agony and deprivation of livelihood suffered by the complainant.

You May Also Like

From Accident Injury to Mortality – SC for Proof Beyond Proximity

legaldeli

Arbitration Survives Allegations: Bombay HC on Fraud, Fairness and Finality

legaldeli

Section 206(4) of the Companies Act, 2013 – Essential ingredients

legaldeli

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I HAVE READ THE DISCLAIMER AND AGREE TO IT.

User Acknowledgement

By proceeding further and clicking on the "AGREE" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about LegalDeli for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from LegalDeli or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this knowledge site. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below.

Disclaimer
About: This knowledge-site (www.LegalDeli.in) is owned and operated by LegalDeli (“LD”), and is a resource for your informational and educational purposes only.

No Warranty: LD does not warrant that any content or information contained on this knowledge-site is accurate, correct, complete or up-to-date, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any actual or threatened loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or otherwise. LD assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the content and/or information contained on this knowledge-site, nor does it offer any warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied in relation to such content or information.

Third-Party Links: LD does not intend that links / URLs contained on this knowledge-site re-directing users to third party websites be considered as referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with any such third party website operators. LD is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the content or information contained on such third party websites to which links may be provided on this knowledge-site.

No Legal Advice: By clicking ‘I agree’ and proceeding further, you acknowledge, represent and undertake that you on your own accord wish to know more about LD, its capabilities and research content and information contained on the knowledge-site, for your own knowledge and personal use. The content and information contained on this knowledge-site should not be construed as nor relied upon as legal advice. You as a reader or recipient of content or information contained in this knowledge-site should not act, nor refrain from acting, based upon any or all of such content or information, but should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel licensed to practice the relevant law in the appropriate jurisdiction.

No Attorney-Client Relationship: This knowledge-site is not intended to be and you should not consider the content or information contained therein to be an advertisement, solicitation, inducement or invitation for an Attorney-Client relationship. Transmission, receipt or use of this knowledge-site, including content and information contained therein, does not constitute nor create an Attorney-Client relationship between LD and you.

I Agree