Bombay High Court orders action against fraudulent WhatsApp groups, websites impersonating DBS Bank

The Bombay High Court recently directed WhatsApp and a domain registrar to act swiftly against alleged online frauds that were impersonating DBS Bank India and using its name to dupe investors [DBS Bank v. John Doe & Ors.].

Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh allowed an interim plea filed by DBS Bank to block such fraudulent WhatsApp groups and fake investment websites found misusing the bank’s corporate name and its CEO’s profile. 

The bank alleged that there was a coordinated campaign of impersonation and financial fraud at play. According to DBS, unknown persons posed as its officials, ran WhatsApp groups using the DBS name and the photograph of CEO and MD Rajat Varma.

Backed by forged SEBI and corporate documents, the fraudulent accounts directed investors to fraudulent trading websites and apps, the bank said.

It relied on instances where victims were allegedly induced to invest large sums after being sent fake DBS identity cards, a fabricated certificate of incorporation and a forged SEBI broker certificate over WhatsApp. 

DBS sought to enforce the due diligence and grievance‑redress obligations of intermediaries under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

It argued that the online intermediary platforms must act promptly once such fraudulent activity is flagged.

WhatsApp argued that because of end‑to‑end encryption, it cannot see messages in any chat. It also said that blocking an account wipes all content. The platform, therefore, urged that there should be no blanket blocking orders and that DBS should instead approach the Court on a case‑by‑case basis, once specific groups are identifed.

The judge rejected that position and held that intermediaries cannot insist on acting only on the basis of specific court orders.

Under the relevant rules, intermediaries are required to make reasonable efforts and operate a grievance mechanism capable of responding within 36 hours in cases of impersonation, fraud and misuse, the Court underscored.

It underlined the need for proactive and time‑bound intervention in such matters.

The Court also restrained the John Doe (anonymous) defendants from using “DBS Bank India Limited” or any deceptively similar name, or from passing off any services as originating from or endorsed by the bank or its officials. 

It directed the intermediaries to remove or disable dubious WhatsApp groups, profiles and content misusing DBS’s name and impersonating its CEO and officials. 

This is to be done within the timelines in the Information Technology Rules, once DBS supplies screenshots and group or account identifiers, along with an undertaking that such content is not authorised by it, the Court added.

The Court further directed the domain registrar, Gname.com, to suspend or block several websites found to be falsely representing themselves as DBS or claiming an association with it, including indiadbs.me and dbsindia.vip.

Senior Advocate Birendra Saraf, with advocates Rohan Savant, Monisha Mane Bhangale, Bijal Vora, Tamanna Meghrajani, and PR Hariharan, briefed by Parinam Law Associates, appeared for DBS Bank.

Senior Advocate Vivek Reddy, with advocates Swati Agarwal, Harti Lakhani, Shashank Mishra, Vaarish Sawlani, Vedika Rathore, Abhishek Mookherjee, Suvaroop Saha Roy, and Pival Peddireddi, briefed by Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas (SAM), appeared for Whatsapp LLC.

SAM also appeared for Meta Platforms through advocates Rishabh Jaisani, Amee Rana and Nitya Chowdhary. 

[Read order]