Launch of Central Suspect Registry to Combat Cyber Crimes

Executive Summary:

The rise in cybercrime targeting vulnerable individuals, particularly students and their families, has reached alarming levels. Impersonation scams, where fraudsters pose as Law Enforcement Officers, have become increasingly sophisticated, exploiting fear, urgency, and social stigma. This report delves into recent incidents of ransom scams involving fake CBI officers, highlighting the execution methods, psychological impact on victims, and preventive measures. The goal is to raise public awareness and equip individuals with the knowledge needed to protect themselves from such fraudulent activities.

Introduction:

Cybercriminals are evolving their tactics, with impersonation and social engineering at the forefront. Scams involving fake law enforcement officers have become rampant, preying on the fear of legal repercussions and the desire to protect loved ones. This report examines incidents where scammers impersonated CBI officers to extort money from families of students, emphasizing the urgent need for awareness, verification, and preventive measures.

Case Study:

This case study explains how the scammers impersonate themselves for the money targeting students' families. 

Targets receive calls from scammers posing as CBI officers. Mostly the families of students are targeted by the fraudsters using sophisticated impersonation and emotional manipulation tactics. In our case study, the targets received calls  from  unknown international numbers, falsely claiming that the students, along with their friends, were involved in a fabricated rape case. The parents get calls during school or college hours, a time when it is particularly difficult and chaotic for parents to reach their children, adding to the panic and sense of urgency. The scammers manipulate the parents by stating that, due to the students' clean records, they are not officially arrested but would face severe legal consequences unless a sum of money is paid immediately. 

Although in these specific cases, the parents did not pay the money, many parents in our country fall victim to such scams, paying large sums out of fear and desperation to protect their children’s futures. The fear of legal repercussions, social stigma, and the potential damage to the students' reputations, the scammers used high-pressure tactics to force compliance. 

These incidents may  result in significant financial losses, emotional trauma, and a profound loss of trust in communication channels and authorities. This underscores the urgent need for awareness, verification of authority, and prompt reporting of such scams to prevent further victimisation

Modus Operandi:

• Caller ID Spoofing: The scammer used a unknown  number and spoofing techniques to mimic a legitimate law enforcement authority.
• Fear Induction: The fraudster played on the family's fear of social stigma, manipulating them into compliance through emotional blackmail.

Analysis:

Our research found that the unknown international numbers used in these scams are not real but are puppet numbers often used for prank calls and fraudulent activities. This incident also raises concerns about data breaches, as the scammers accurately recited students' details, including names and their parents' information, adding a layer of credibility and increasing the pressure on the victims. These incidents result in significant financial losses, emotional trauma, and a profound loss of trust in communication channels and authorities.

Impact on Victims:

• Financial and Psychological Losses: The family may face substantial financial losses, coupled with emotional and psychological distress.
• Loss of Trust in Authorities: Such scams undermine trust in official communication and law enforcement channels.
• Exploitation of Fear and Urgency: Scammers prey on emotions such as fear, urgency, and social stigma to manipulate victims.
• Sophisticated Impersonation Techniques: Using caller ID spoofing, Virtual/Temporary numbers and impersonation of Law Enforcement Officers adds credibility to the scam.
• Lack of Verification: Victims often do not verify the caller's identity, leading to successful scams.
• Significant Psychological Impact: Beyond financial losses, these scams cause lasting emotional trauma and distrust in institutions.

Recommendations:

• Cross-Verification: Always cross-verify with official sources before acting on such claims. Always contact official numbers listed on trusted Government websites to verify any claims made by callers posing as law enforcement.
• Promote Awareness: Educational institutions should conduct regular awareness programs to help students and families recognize and respond to scams.
• Encourage Prompt Reporting: Reporting such incidents to authorities can help track scammers and prevent future cases. Encourage victims to report incidents promptly to local authorities and cybercrime units.
• Enhance Public Awareness: Continuous public awareness campaigns are essential to educate people about the risks and signs of impersonation scams.
• Educational Outreach: Schools and colleges should include Cybersecurity awareness as part of their curriculum, focusing on identifying and responding to scams.
• Parental Guidance and Support: Parents should be encouraged to discuss online safety and scam tactics with their children regularly, fostering a vigilant mindset.

Conclusion:

The rise of impersonation scams targeting students and their families is a growing concern that demands immediate attention. By raising awareness, encouraging verification of claims, and promoting proactive reporting, we can protect vulnerable individuals from falling victim to these manipulative and harmful tactics. It is high time for the  authorities, educational institutions, and the public to collaborate in combating these scams and safeguarding our communities. Strengthening data protection measures and enhancing public education on the importance of verifying claims can significantly reduce the impact of these fraudulent schemes and prevent further victimisation.

‍

Executive Summary: 

‍

A purported media release allegedly issued in the name of the International Cricket Council (ICC) is being widely circulated on social media. The release claims that the ICC has decided to impose a one-year ban on Pakistan cricket. CyberPeace’s research found this claim to be false.The research  revealed that the media release circulating on social media is fake, and no such letter or official statement has been issued by the ICC.

‍

Claim:

‍

On social media platform X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the viral letter on February 3, 2026, claiming that an ICC meeting was held in which board members voted on issues related to Pakistan. The post alleged that 14 out of 16 votes were cast in favour of the BCCI. The user further claimed that Pakistan’s share of ICC revenue would be reduced and that Pakistan might be asked to compensate for losses incurred by the ICC.

The viral letter, written in English, stated that matters related to Pakistan were discussed in an ICC meeting and that a 14–2 majority vote led to the decision to impose a one-year ban on Pakistan cricket. It further claimed that the Pakistan Super League (PSL) would be suspended for one year, Pakistan’s annual revenue share would be reduced from 5.75 percent to 2.25 percent, and Pakistan would not be allowed to host any ICC tournaments until 2040. The letter also claimed that these decisions were taken to safeguard the integrity and spirit of the game. Links to the viral post, archive link, and screenshots can be seen below.

‍

• https://x.com/Jitendr62858659/status/2018675523442937953 

‍

‍

Fact Check: 

‍

To verify the viral claim, CyberPeace conducted a Google search using relevant keywords. However, no credible or reliable media reports supporting the claim were found. In the next step of the research , an official press release uploaded on DD Sports’ Facebook page on February 2, 2026, was found. The press release responded to Pakistan’s decision not to play against India in a Group A match. The DD Sports statement said that the Pakistan Cricket Board should consider the long-term and serious implications of such a decision, as it could impact the global cricket ecosystem—of which Pakistan is itself a member and beneficiary.

‍

‍

‍

Notably, the official press release made no mention of any ban on Pakistan cricket, reduction in revenue share, suspension of the PSL, or restrictions on hosting ICC tournaments, contrary to the claims made in the viral letter. Further, the same official statement was found published on the ICC’s website on February 1, 2026. This release also did not mention any decision related to banning Pakistan cricket or barring the country from hosting ICC tournaments for the next 40 years.

‍

• https://www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/icc-statement-on-icc-men-s-t20-world-cup-2026

‍

Conclusion

‍

CyberPeace concludes that the media release circulating on social media is fake. The ICC has not issued any official letter or statement announcing a one-year ban on Pakistan cricket, revenue cuts, or restrictions on hosting ICC tournaments.

‍

Introduction 

Parliament is about to begin its Monsoon Session from July 20, 2026 to August 13, 2026, and the mood in Delhi already feels charged. Ahead of the opening bell, the government has flagged five new bills for introduction, alongside a couple of pending pieces of legislation it may take up for passage. Predictably, the political oxygen in the run-up has gone almost entirely to what isn't on that list — reports this week noted the conspicuous absence of the long-anticipated Delimitation Bill and a Constitutional amendment for women's reservation in the Lok Sabha, a gap that has already drawn sharp reactions from Congress leaders. What is on the list has generated its own share of noise: a Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill that NGOs are watching warily, a Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Bill tied to safeguards for the National Flag and Anthem, and a Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill proposing to raise the Court's sanctioned strength from 33 to 37. Every one of these will command its share of prime-time debate. But tucked quietly among the five is a bill that, headline for headline, may end up mattering more to the everyday Indian economy than all the others combined: the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (Amendment) Bill, 2026.

MSMEs play a foundational role in India’s economic engine, powering employment, entrepreneurship and growth across the country. That makes this Bill one worth watching closely, because even seemingly technical changes to the MSME framework could have very real consequences for millions of businesses and the people whose livelihoods depend on them.

‍

What the Bill Actually Does

‍

The MSME sector hasn't seen a structural legal update since the original MSMED Act of 2006 nearly two decades in an economy that looks nothing like it did back then. The new amendment is designed to close that gap. According to the government's own description of the bill, it aims to align the 2006 law with the sector's changed realities, improve ease of doing business, and shift toward what officials are calling "trust-based" regulation rather than a purely compliance-driven approach.

Three provisions stand out. 

1. First, it strengthens the mechanism for resolving delayed payments to micro and small enterprises, arguably the single biggest complaint MSME owners have voiced for years.
2. Second, it creates a pathway to enforce arbitral awards specifically for micro and small units, giving smaller suppliers real teeth when a dispute is decided in their favor.
3. Third, it gives states more flexibility in deciding the composition of Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Councils (MSEFCs) , the bodies that adjudicate payment disputes which should allow more councils to be formed and cut down on case backlogs.

‍

The Delayed Payment Crisis, in Numbers

‍

To understand why this matters, look at the scale of the problem the bill is trying to fix. The MSME Ministry's Samadhaan portal, which lets small enterprises file delayed-payment complaints online, had received close to 2.57 lakh applications as of June 2026, involving claimed dues of roughly ₹55,244 crore. Of these, only about 58,000 cases had actually been resolved by facilitation councils. That's a resolution rate that leaves the vast majority of small businesses waiting often for money already owed to them for goods or services delivered.

The government did tighten the screws somewhat in 2024 through Section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act, which denies large buyers a tax deduction if they don't pay MSME suppliers within the 15-to-45-day window mandated by law. Enforcement, however, has remained patchy, and industry bodies like Assocham have continued to flag delayed payments including from PSUs and government departments as a core source of financial stress for small firms, with high interest charges on overdue statutory dues compounding the problem.

‍

Why This Is Bigger Than One Bill

‍

A regulation targeting the payments practices of India's micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises is more than just paperwork and procedural wrangling; the stakes for the Indian economy and society are enormous. According to the 2025-26 Economic Survey, MSMEs now contribute about 31.1% of India’s GDP, 35.4% of its manufacturing output, and 48.58% of its exports, while employing 33 to 39 crore people and providing India’s second largest source of employment after agriculture. The official Udyam database of MSMEs crossed the 8.7 crore mark by June 2026, underscoring a clear trend towards the sector’s formalisation in the last few years. Access to finance is the second pillar of MSME empowerment.  The Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises has authorised several lakh crores in guarantees, and most recently, the government increased its loan guarantee cover ceiling from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10 crore to facilitate more collateral-free loans to businesses. However, the actual credit gap remains estimated in the tens of lakh crores, with the biggest gaps faced by women-led and medium enterprises. While the MSME Bill doesn’t directly address access to finance, improved and quicker payment settlement mechanisms are expected to relieve some working-capital stress and dissuade small firms from falling into expensive informal credit markets. The MSME Bill also adds to a wave of recent measures to de-regulate smaller enterprises, such as the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill that was passed earlier in 2026.  That Bill modified or deleted criminal offences with a more lenient civil equivalent across numerous central acts, a change industry lobby FISME called a significant move towards ease of doing business.

‍

The Data Protection Clock Is Already Ticking - The Gap Payment Reform Won't Close

‍

It's also worth noting that India's Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 is now in force, with rules notified in November 2025 and full compliance — including breach notification, security safeguards. With nearly half of Indian small businesses already reporting cyber incidents each year, MSMEs have a narrowing runway to build the security practices this regime will expect of them. Given that scale of exposure, there's a real case for the MSME Amendment Bill, or a companion policy, to go further — mandating baseline cyber-hygiene standards for Udyam-registered firms or tying credit-guarantee schemes to demonstrated security practices. Payment reform alone protects an MSME's right to be paid; it does little to protect what happens to that money, or that data, once it arrives.Payment reform alone protects an MSME's right to be paid; it does little to protect what happens to that money, or that data, once it arrives. CyberPeace calls on relevant agencies to issue clearer advisories and introduce additional, cost-friendly cybersecurity safeguards tailored to MSMEs' limited budgets and IT capacity. 

‍

What to Watch For

‍

Whether the MSME Bill gets the attention it deserves during this session is an open question. With the Opposition expected to spend political capital on delimitation, the Vande Mataram bill, unemployment, inflation, and the NEET paper-leak controversy, a technical amendment to an enterprise development law is unlikely to dominate floor debate even though it may end up affecting more households than any single headline bill this session.

‍

Conclusion

‍

For India's roughly 7-8 crore MSMEs, most of them family-run and thinly capitalised, the details that get finalised in the coming weeks how MSEFCs are reconstituted, how arbitral awards get enforced, how "trust-based" regulation is actually defined will matter far more than who wins the argument over delimitation. It's worth watching this one closely, even if the cameras are pointed elsewhere.

‍

Sources

‍

1. https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/vande-mataram-bill-among-five-new-legislations-listed-for-monsoon-session-126071601319_1.html
2. https://www.prokerala.com/news/articles/a1780267.html 

‍