Analysis: State by Cybercrime Police vs. Abubakar Siddique [C.C.No. 24836/2009]

Introduction:

Looking at the present scenario, the rapid growth of Information Technology is closing all our lives within the four walls. These advancements brought a change in our office lifestyle and transformed all our works as the shift from bulky paper works to paperless PPT presentations. Now if we look into the political, economic, and social backgrounds. We will notice that all the privileged data is stored in computer software; which requires good protection because as internets extends it brings crime with it. In today’s time, the crime rates are increasing not only in a physical sense. But also through computers and technological means so it is required to make stringent laws against these crimes.

However, the strict laws should not punish the innocent. And, to prove the crime all the ingredients of the crime must be fulfilled. All the circumstantial or substantial evidence must point that the accused committed the crime. This case deals with the crime of hacking bank accounts.

Facts

A complaint was lodge with the cybercrime police about the hacking. Unauthorized transfer of money from 6 bank accounts to an unknown person’s account. The cyber police registered the case and on completion of the investigation filed a final report against the accused no. 2 with other accused alleging to make a wrongful gain by hacking and transferring money; from the 6 bank accounts by conspiring with the other accused. Also transferring an amount of Rs.67,349/- in their respective bank accounts. According to the prosecution, the accused also recharged the mobile phones and paid the post-paid bills to the different subscribers.

The accused was charged for the crime of criminal conspiracy, cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property; under section 420, 120(b) r/w section 34 of IPC, 1860 and computer-related offenses under Section 66 of IT Act, 2000. The police found a hard disk during the investigation; which was to the executive director of CDAC (center for development of advanced computing) for examination. During his cross-examination, the C DAC director deposed that this hard disk contained no bank account name; bank account password or bank account number.

The accused was summon to the court and the provisions of section 207 and 317 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 were complie with. The accused stated that he has only studied up to 9^th grade and had no knowledge about the computers. He denied all the evidence against him and pleaded not guilty.

The accused was acquit of all offenses.

Issue

Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused no. 2 Abubakar Siddique has committed the offense of criminal conspiracy and cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, punishable under sections 420 and 120(B) r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and under section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000?

Holding

The court held that the accused was not guilty and that he was wrongly implicated in this case as no evidence could help the court to come to the conclusion that the accused hacked the 6 bank accounts in question. The prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of Section 420, 120(b) r/w section 34 of IPC and section 66 of IT Act, 2000. The prosecution could also not prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Rationale

To establish a charge of criminal conspiracy under section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution must prove an agreement between two or more persons to do or cause to be done some illegal act or some act which is not illegal by illegal means and this fact can be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence. The prosecution’s evidence was not sufficient to prove that the accused had committed the crime of hacking by conspiring with the other accused. The offense of conspiracy cannot be deemed to have been established on mere suspicion and surmises or inference with a lack of support of cogent evidence.

The essential ingredients of Section 420 IPC are:- (i) cheating; (ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or to make, alter or destroy any valuable security or anything which is sealed or signed or is capable of being converted into a valuable security, and (iii) mens rea of the accused at the time of making the inducement.  The prosecution could not prove that the accused induced or cheated and the intention of hacking. This did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

To be liable computer-related crime under Section 66 of IT Act, 2000, the person must have fraudulently or dishonestly committed any act mentioned in section 43 of IT Act, 2000. As there was no evidence against the accused of accessing or hacking the bank accounts, he was acquitted.

Conclusion

People use the internet for almost everything these days, from shopping, watching videos, surfing, to net banking. The cyberspace though has its advantages come with its challenges. Hacking, spoofing, spamming are very common cybercrimes in today’s world. These crimes may seem ordinary they are not easy to prove in court. The investigation of a cybercrime requires time and experts best in the field. The hackers easily bounce their IP addresses these days which makes it harder to trace them and charge them with the crime.

However, the cyber police should have enough evidence and should be able to prove the guilt of the convict beyond a reasonable doubt. Just to hold someone accountable for a cybercrime, police should not accuse a person wrongly even with no or little evidence against them. This may lead to injustice and an innocent person may be held accountable. The police therefore should do a thorough investigation and have enough evidence to prove that a person has committed a cybercrime.