(1.) The banking sector has adopted technology for the efficiency of the banking business and also for faster and hassle-free customer service. Technology enables the service provider to offer customers and clients a plethora of benefits that allow them to dispense with their physical presence for banking transactions. The growth of the banking sector by use of technology has also given rise to a new form of fraud using counter technologies against the bank. Technology provides services without boundaries. Geographical location is no longer a constraint due to the onset of the use of technology. The convenience of service without boundaries and access to service from anywhere is the aim of any business. Criminals and fraudsters also have grown at the same pace as that of the growth of technology. Criminals are also now able to disguise their location and operate from anywhere in the world. The use of technology has resulted in the dissemination of personal data. Data can no longer be stored as done in a brick and mortar system. Data is bound to be exposed in different forms depending upon the nature of the service provided. Technology has its own set of advantages and pitfalls. Data theft in Cyber Law means stealing another person's confidential or personal information without his consent or authority. The online banking service of a customer is linked with his email and mobile number. This is essentially used to authenticate banking transactions of the customers. Fraudsters having knowledge about this authentication method, have devised fraud using SIM cards and email. These two cases before me depict a case of SIM swapping fraud to gain access to bank accounts of the petitioners and to withdraw money from their bank accounts. The petitioners allege fraudulent transactions by the third parties to withdraw money from their accounts online. Since the point of law involved in both these writ petitions is one and the same, it is appropriate to dispose of both these writ petitions by way of common judgment.
(2.) W.P.(C).No.28823/2017 has been filed by Tony Enterprises and Tony Lites, a proprietary firm and a partnership firm respectively, both of which have a cash credit account at Chittoor Road branch of Oriental Bank of Commerce. The petitioners had also availed the online banking facility of the Bank, the alerts in respect of which would be sent and were linked to the mobile number of one Mr.Tony Davies, the sole proprietor of the first petitioner and the Manager of the second petitioner. On 8th June, 2017, Mr.Tony Davies came to realize that a total amount of Rs.16,25,000/- had been unauthorizedly transferred from the accounts of the petitioners by way of online transactions effected through the online banking app of the Bank. The registered mobile number of Mr.Tony Davies had become dysfunctional on 6 th June 2017 and he had approached the service provider, M/s. Idea Cellular on 7th June 2017 to enquire regarding the same. He was told by the representative of M/s.Idea Cellular that his number had become dysfunctional as a duplicate SIM card had been issued in respect of the number on 6th June 2017 upon the request of a person who had fraudulently represented himself as Mr.Tony Davies. Upon subsequent restoration of network services after re-issuance of a duplicate SIM, he reaslised that such amounts had been unduly transferred to several accounts from the bank accounts of the petitioners.
(3.) W.P.(C).No.28824/2017 has been filed by one Mr.Cherian C.Kariparambil and a partnership firm called MINDSTRONG HR Solutions. The first petitioner has overdraft facility account with South Indian Bank and the second petitioner has a current account with HDFC Bank. The petitioners had also availed the online banking facility of the Bank, the alerts in respect of which would be sent and were linked to the mobile number of the first petitioner who is also the Managing Partner of the second petitioner-firm. On 28 th April 2017, Mr.Cherian came to realize that a total amount of Rs. 23,00,000/- had been unauthorizedly transferred from the accounts of the petitioners by way of online transactions effected through the respective online banking apps of the Bank. Mr.Cherian's registered mobile number had become dysfunctional on 25th April 2017 and he had approached the service provider, M/s BSNL Telecom on 27th April 2017 to enquire regarding the same. He was told by the representative of M/s BSNL Telecom that his number had become dysfunctional as a duplicate SIM card had been issued in respect of the number on 25th June 2017 upon the request of a person who had fraudulently represented himself as Mr.Cherian by furnishing ID proofs belonging to him. Upon subsequent restoration of network services after re-issuance of a duplicate SIM, he realized that such amounts had been unduly transferred to several accounts from the bank accounts of the petitioners.