A caller falsely posing as police, customs or an enforcement officer who threatens arrest unless you pay — the "digital arrest" scam — commits extortion and cheating under Sections 308, 318 and 319 of India's Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, replacing IPC Sections 383-384, 419 and 420, with sharply higher punishment for personation.
The situation
A person receives a phone call or video call from someone claiming to be a police officer, a customs official, or an officer of an enforcement agency. The caller says a parcel, SIM card or bank account linked to the person's name has been used in a crime — for example money laundering, narcotics or fake documents — and that the person must stay on the call, follow instructions, or transfer money to a specified account to avoid immediate arrest. Some callers ask the victim to remain visible on a video call for hours as a form of "digital custody" while the matter is supposedly "verified". Section 43(1) BNSS describes an arrest as the officer actually touching or confining the body of the person, unless there is a submission to the custody by word or action — it provides no mode of arrest by phone or video call. What has actually happened is that the victim has been threatened and, in many cases, deceived into handing over money.
Old law vs new law at a glance
| Issue | Old law (IPC / IT Act 2000) | New law (BNS / IT Act 2000) | What changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threatening a person to extract money by inducing fear generally | Sections 383 (definition), 384 (punishment, up to three years) IPC | Section 308(1)-(2) BNS — definition retained, base punishment raised to seven years | Modified — base punishment more than doubled |
| Extortion by threat of an accusation of an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment or up to ten years | Sections 388-389 IPC — up to ten years; imprisonment for life if the accusation was of a Section 377 IPC offence | Section 308(6)-(7) BNS — up to ten years and fine | Modified — ten-year maximum retained and consolidated into one section; the IPC's Section 377 life-imprisonment limb is not carried over |
| Extortion committed using an electronic device (a phone or messaging app) | No dedicated illustration in IPC Section 383 | Section 308(1) BNS, Illustration (e), expressly covers a threat made "by sending a message through an electronic device" | Expanded — the new illustration puts phone/app-based extortion on the same footing as any other threat |
| Falsely claiming to be a police officer, customs officer or other official | Section 419 IPC — up to three years | Section 319(1)-(2) BNS — up to five years | Modified — punishment raised |
| Falsely posing as an official using a phone, computer or communication device | Section 66D, Information Technology Act, 2000 — up to three years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh | Section 66D IT Act, unchanged | Identical — the IT Act was not touched by the 2023 codes |
| Deceiving the victim into handing over money or property | Section 420 IPC — up to seven years | Section 318(4) BNS — up to seven years | Identical |
| Misusing the victim's OTP, card details, password or Aadhaar number obtained during the call | Section 66C, Information Technology Act, 2000 — up to three years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh | Section 66C IT Act, unchanged | Identical |
| Reporting the fraud to police | No express provision allowing information "by electronic communication" in the corresponding CrPC section for this scenario | Section 173(1) BNSS — information on a cognizable offence may be given orally or by electronic communication, at any police station irrespective of the area of the offence | Modified — Section 154 CrPC covered oral and written information only; the electronic-communication route and the "irrespective of the area" wording are new in Section 173(1) BNSS |
What the law requires now, step by step
Step 1 — The false claim of authority is personation
The caller's core deception is pretending to be someone he is not — a police, customs or enforcement officer. Section 319(1) BNS defines this: a person cheats by personation "if he cheats by pretending to be some other person... or representing that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is." The punishment is set out in Section 319(2) BNS:
"Whoever cheats by personation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both."
Under the IPC, the same conduct was punished under Section 419, capped at three years. Where the impersonation happens over a phone call, video call or messaging app, Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, applies concurrently:
"Whoever, by means of any communication device or computer resource cheats by personation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees."
Step 2 — The threat that induces fear is extortion
The moment the caller uses the false claim to frighten the victim into paying or complying, the offence of extortion is engaged. Section 308(1) BNS carries the same definition as IPC Section 383, and the section's own illustrations now expressly contemplate a threat made through an electronic device:
"A threatens Z by sending a message through an electronic device that "Your child is in my possession, and will be put to death unless you send me one lakh rupees." A thus induces Z to give him money. A has committed extortion."
The base punishment for extortion has increased. Section 308(2) BNS provides:
"Whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both."
IPC Sections 383-384 capped the same conduct at three years. Where the caller threatens the victim with an accusation of having committed an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, Section 308(6)-(7) BNS provides imprisonment up to ten years and fine — the same ten-year maximum as IPC Sections 388-389, although those IPC sections also allowed imprisonment for life where the accusation was of a Section 377 IPC offence, a limb Section 308(6)-(7) does not carry.
Step 3 — The payment obtained is cheating
If the victim transfers money or property because of the deception, the offence of cheating under Section 318 BNS is complete. Section 318(4) BNS states:
"Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person... shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."
This is worded identically to IPC Section 420 and carries the same seven-year maximum; the change in this scenario lies in the extortion and personation elements, not this one.
Step 4 — Misuse of the victim's identifiers
Callers sometimes ask the victim to read out an OTP, share a card number, or verify Aadhaar or PAN details "for verification". If those details are then used fraudulently, Section 66C of the IT Act, 2000, can apply — fraudulent or dishonest use of another person's electronic signature, password or unique identification feature, punishable with imprisonment up to three years and a fine up to one lakh rupees. This provision has not been touched by the 2023 codes and sits alongside whichever code (IPC or BNS) governs the date of the underlying offence.
Step 5 — Reporting the offence
Section 173(1) BNSS sets out how information about a cognizable offence reaches the police:
"Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station."
Where the information is given electronically, Section 173(1)(ii) BNSS requires it to be "taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it" — the statutory basis for lodging an FIR electronically at any police station, regardless of where the fraud occurred. Section 173(3) also allows the officer in charge, for a cognizable offence made punishable for three years or more but less than seven years, to conduct a preliminary enquiry within fourteen days before proceeding, with the prior permission of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The BNSS First Schedule lists Section 308(2) (seven years) and Section 318(4) (seven years) as cognizable and non-bailable, and Section 319(2) (five years) as cognizable and bailable — so of these, only Section 319(2) falls in the Section 173(3) band. Simple cheating under Section 318(2) is listed as non-cognizable and bailable, so information about it alone goes to Section 174 BNSS, not Section 173.
What changed — and what did not
- Modified: Base punishment for extortion — three years under IPC Sections 383-384 to seven years under Section 308(2) BNS.
- Modified: Punishment for cheating by personation — three years under IPC Section 419 to five years under Section 319(2) BNS.
- Expanded: Section 308(1) BNS adds an illustration that expressly recognises a threat sent "through an electronic device" as extortion — the IPC's illustrations did not contemplate this.
- Identical: Cheating that induces delivery of property — Section 420 IPC and Section 318(4) BNS both cap punishment at seven years.
- Modified: Extortion by threat of an accusation of an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment or up to ten years keeps its ten-year maximum (Sections 388-389 IPC to Section 308(6)-(7) BNS), but the IPC's life-imprisonment limb for an accusation of a Section 377 IPC offence is not carried over.
- Unchanged: IT Act Sections 66C (identity theft) and 66D (cheating by personation using a computer resource) were not amended by the 2023 codes and apply regardless of which criminal code governs the date of the offence.
- Modified (procedure, not offence): compared with Section 154 CrPC, Section 173(1) BNSS writes an explicit "by electronic communication" route into the text of the FIR provision itself, and expressly permits giving that information "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed."
Which law applies to your case
If the call, threat or payment happened before 1 July 2024, the offence is governed by the Indian Penal Code, 1860, not the BNS. Section 358(2) BNS preserves this: it states that the repeal of the IPC does not affect "any penalty, or punishment incurred in respect of any offences committed against the Code so repealed", and any such proceeding "may be instituted, continued or enforced... as if that Code had not been repealed." Separately, if a police investigation or trial was already underway on 1 July 2024, Section 531(2)(a) BNSS continues that specific proceeding under the old Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, procedure. For the full rule, including how these two provisions interact, see Which law applies to an offence committed before 1 July 2024.
Practical checklist
For the person who received the call:
- Do not transfer money, stay on a forced video call, or share an OTP, card or Aadhaar/PAN detail — Section 43(1) BNSS describes an arrest as physically touching or confining the body of the person (or submission to custody), and provides no mode of arrest by phone or video call.
- End the call and verify independently, using a number you look up yourself, not one the caller gives you.
- Preserve the call log, any recording, chat screenshots, and the bank transaction reference.
- Give the information to police under Section 173(1) BNSS — orally or by electronic communication, at any station regardless of where the fraud originated.
For the advocate:
- Identify which sub-sections apply: Section 308 BNS for the threat, Section 318 BNS for property delivered, Section 319 BNS for personation; add Sections 66C/66D IT Act where a computer resource was used.
- Confirm the offence date before citing a section — pre-1 July 2024 conduct cites the IPC, not the BNS.
- Check whether the complaint was recorded within Section 173(1) BNSS's three-day electronic-signing window, and whether a Section 173(3) preliminary enquiry applies — of the offences here, only Section 319(2) BNS (cognizable, five years) falls in its three-years-or-more-but-less-than-seven band; Section 318(2) is non-cognizable.
Frequently asked questions
Someone called claiming to be a police or customs officer and said I'm under "digital arrest" — is that a real arrest?
Section 43(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), describes an arrest as the officer actually touching or confining the body of the person, unless there is a submission to custody by word or action; it provides no mode of arrest by phone or video call. What the caller is doing — putting you in fear of a false accusation to make you pay — is extortion under Section 308 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and, if you part with money, cheating under Section 318 BNS. If the caller falsely poses as an officer, that is also cheating by personation under Section 319 BNS.
What replaced Section 420 IPC for this kind of fraud?
Section 318(4) of the BNS is the direct successor to Section 420 IPC — cheating that dishonestly induces the victim to deliver property — and keeps the same punishment, imprisonment up to seven years plus fine.
Has the punishment for personation gone up under the new law?
Yes. Section 419 IPC capped cheating by personation at three years. Section 319(2) BNS raises the maximum to five years, or fine, or both. Where the personation is carried out using a phone, computer or communication device, Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, also applies, with imprisonment up to three years and a fine up to one lakh rupees.
Does the extortion punishment change under BNS?
Yes. Sections 383 and 384 IPC capped simple extortion at three years. Section 308(2) BNS raises the base punishment to seven years. Where the extortion is committed by putting a person in fear of an accusation of an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment or up to ten years, Section 308(6)-(7) BNS provides up to ten years and fine — the same ten-year maximum as IPC Sections 388-389, minus the IPC's additional life-imprisonment limb for an accusation of a Section 377 IPC offence.
How do I report an online fraud or digital arrest call?
Section 173(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), lets you give information about a cognizable offence either orally at a police station or by electronic communication, and it applies irrespective of which police station's area the offence was committed in. An electronic complaint is taken on record once you sign it within three days.
If the caller used my OTP, card number or Aadhaar details, is that a separate offence?
It can be. Fraudulently using another person's electronic signature, password or unique identification feature is identity theft under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 — imprisonment up to three years and a fine up to one lakh rupees. This provision is unchanged and applies whether the underlying fraud happened before or after 1 July 2024.
Related on Veritect
- Which law applies to an offence committed before 1 July 2024
- Section 415-420 IPC vs Section 318-319 BNS — Cheating
- Zero FIR: mandatory provisions
- Bounced cheque: NI Act case, cheating case, or both
- Threatened for money or with harm: extortion and threats
- Section 384 IPC vs Section 308 BNS — Extortion (IPC 383-389)
Statutory sources
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 383, 384, 419, 420 (repealed w.e.f. 1 July 2024)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 308, 318, 319, 358
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — Sections 66C, 66D
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 43, 173, 174, 531; First Schedule
This guide explains the statutory text of the BNS, BNSS and BSA as enacted. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.