Supreme Court Applauds Tamil Nadu’s Use of Preventive Detention to Tackle Cybercrime Surge

In a significant nod to Tamil Nadu's proactive stance on cybercrime, the Supreme Court has commended the state for invoking preventive detention laws to combat the growing menace of online financial fraud. The bench, comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and Joymalya Bagchi, praised the state’s approach, describing it as a “very welcome trend.”

The appreciation came during the hearing of a writ petition filed by the father of Abhijeet Singh, who was detained under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982 — commonly known as the Goondas Act. Singh was accused of defrauding a woman of ₹84.5 lakh through a sophisticated cybercrime operation.

Preventive Detention as a Cybercrime Deterrent

The Supreme Court acknowledged the limitations of traditional criminal law in dealing with modern cyber frauds. “Normal criminal laws are not proving successful against these offenders,” the bench observed. “It is a good trend coming from the state to use preventive detention laws against cyber offenders.”

Tamil Nadu’s administrative and legislative actions were seen as a necessary evolution in law enforcement tactics, given the scale and complexity of cyber scams. The court also noted the emotional and financial devastation caused to victims of such crimes and endorsed strong preventive mechanisms.

Details of the Case

The detention order against Singh was issued by the Theni District Collector on August 23, 2024, following an investigation by the Cyber Crime Branch. Singh was alleged to be part of an organized network and had funneled over ₹12 lakh into companies linked to him and his family, attempting to launder the defrauded money.

According to the Tamil Nadu government’s submission, their probe led to the recovery of significant evidence, including:

• ₹44,000 in cash

• 100+ credit/debit cards

• 5 mobile phones

• 27 bank accounts, 17 of which were involved in similar cyber frauds across India

Legal Challenge and SC’s Observations

Singh’s lawyer, Advocate Laxmikant Matadan Shukla, argued that the act was a one-time offense and that Singh had no prior criminal history. He labeled the detention “excessive” and claimed that due process was not followed, including inadequate time for response and insufficient procedural fairness by the advisory board.

However, the Supreme Court maintained that the duration of preventive detention could not be altered through a writ petition. “If the detention order has no basis, it must go entirely, but courts cannot curtail the detention period. That discretion lies solely with the state,” the bench clarified.

The Tamil Nadu government rebutted the claims, asserting that Singh had been given all relevant documents in languages he could understand — English and Hindi — and had made effective representations at all stages. Singh, a Delhi resident and MBA graduate originally from Punjab, was not deprived of any rights, the government said.

The Madras High Court had earlier upheld the detention order, finding no evidence to suggest that Singh was denied a fair chance to defend himself.

Final Observations and Next Steps

The Supreme Court acknowledged the procedural aspects raised by the petitioner and adjourned the matter to June 25, pending review of documentation not presented during the initial hearing.

Meanwhile, the justices reiterated that Tamil Nadu’s use of preventive detention in the cybercrime context sends a strong message to offenders and highlights a crucial shift in criminal justice thinking.

As online scams continue to evolve, Tamil Nadu’s model may soon become a benchmark for other states battling the same digital threats.