Karnataka High Court asks State to submit material linking LegalPay to "marriage invite" cyberfraud

The Karnataka High Court on Monday directed the State government to place on record material to show how LegalPay Technology Private Limited was connected to a cyberfraud case involving a fake "marriage invitation" APK file sent through WhatsApp [Legal Pay Technology Private Limited v. State of Karnataka].

Justice V Srishananda issued the direction while hearing petitions filed by LegalPay seeking the quashing of three criminal cases registered by Hulimavu Police in connection with the alleged cyber fraud.

“So also, to proceed with the present case and to pass an appropriate order in this writ petition, it is necessary for the investigating agency (either Hulimavu police station or cybercrime police station), as the case may be, shall place on record the prima facie material about the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged fraud in writing,” the Court ordered.

The fraud involved the sending of a file disguised as a marriage invitation on WhatsApp. Clicking on the file link is alleged to have led to the unauthorised transfer of money to fraudsters. Three complaints were filed in the matter. According to the complaints, approximately ₹12.5 lakh was transferred through the LegalPay payment gateway.

During March and April 2026, complainants BK Nageshiah, Subhash Chandra Jujarth and Vashishtha Narayan Jha allegedly lost ₹7,44,989, ₹2,69,729 and ₹2,34,917, respectively.

Based on their complaints, Hulimavu Police registered three separate First Information Reports (FIR) under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 318(4) and 319(2) of the BNS, 2023.

The FIRs named LegalPay as an accused. LegalPay later moved a plea before the High Court to quash the FIRs. The Court had earlier granted LegalPay officials interim protection from arrest in the matter.

Today, Legal Pay's counsel, Senior Advocate MS Shyamsundar, argued that criminal proceedings could not have been initiated against the intermediary payment gateway.

He submitted that if the State established that the entire defrauded amount had been credited to a LegalPay account, he would withdraw the petitions.

The Court proceeded to direct the State to obtain a report identifying the account in which the allegedly defrauded money was lying.

Addressing Senior Counsel Shyamsundar, the Court added,

“Government says hacked all amount is in LegalPay's account. I have asked the government to get a report on whose account money is lying. If the amount is in your account, petitions will be dismissed. If the amount is not there in the LegalPay account, you will be protected."

Meanwhile, High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) Waheed submitted that the State was considering transferring the investigation from Hulimavu Police Station to the Cyber Crime Police Station, considering the nature of the allegations.

He said that the complaints had been sent to cybercrime police stations pursuant to an oral order. Justice Srishananda, however, emphasised the need for a formal transfer notification.

“There is no value to oral order. It must be by a notification. You should hand over investigation with a power to file the final report. You cannot keep on making the same mischief, same mistake,” the judge remarked.

The Court, therefore, directed the State to place on record a formal notification authorising the cybercrime police to investigate the case and file the final report, if the investigation is transferred.

The Court also stressed the importance of identifying the investigating officer and their designation in the charge sheet.

“When charge sheet is filed, the IO's name and his designation should be there. Why? Because Tom, Dick and Harry did not file it. This is filed by an authorised person so as to proceed on that report for further action,” the Court observed.

The Court added that each column in the charge sheet has a specific purpose and must be filled in accordingly.

The matter will next be heard on October 5.