From Digital Scams to Terror Funding: Interlinking Cyber Fraud, UAPA Offences, and the Right to Fair Trial

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The paper critically evaluates the dynamic interplay between cyber fraud and terrorism funding, which, as this paper will discuss, is becoming less-bound by traditional practices of counterterrorism and financial crime-enforcement. The analysis explores the systematic recycling of digital-scam proceeds, online-fraud revenues, and other cybercrime-derived endowments into support of terrorist activities. Modern-day case studies pose that terrorist groups use e-commerce services, vectors of virtual private networks, and online payment systems to purchase resources, transfer funds, and launch strikes; the case of the Gorakhnath Temple attack and Pulwama attack provide an insight into how digital platforms are becoming a critical conduit of financing terrorist activities.

The paper also examines the working of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in the cases that have been prosecuted when cybercrime proceeds are claimed to fund terrorist activities. It examines the application of the UAPA provisions addressing traditional terrorism situations to include digital crimes and terror finance using cyber tools. Special focus is given to analyze how investigative agencies resort to strict action under UAPA such as prolonged detention limits, special classification of public prosecutors, and asset-forfeiture procedures to address this emerging menace.

The paper performs doctrinal legal research complemented by a set of illuminating case studies to trace the patterns of investigation, prosecution, and court reactions to cyber-enabled terror-financing cases. It also looks at institutional structures like Financial Intelligence Unit-India, National Investigation Agency and dedicated counter-terrorism-financing measures. Concluding with recommendations on addressing the vital issue of disrupting the funding of terrorism without compromising on due-process rights, the study offers fair solutions, both in keeping national security and operating within the confines of the constitutional rules on the right to a fair trial in the digital era.