Overview
The CFCFRMS 2.0 was launched in 2021 and has become the main channel for citizens to lodge cyber‑fraud complaints. By 30 June 2026 the platform has helped save **Rs 11,158 crore** across **32.80 lakh** complaints, supported by the toll‑free helpline 1930.
Key Developments
- The Ministry of Home Affairs issued a comprehensive SOP for the NCRP‑CFCFRMS, covering complaint processing, bank coordination, grievance redressal, lien removal and fund restoration.
- From April 2026, the Money Restoration Module and Grievance Redressal Module became operational, speeding up fund recovery and addressing account‑freezing issues.
- The I4C launched a Suspect Registry on 10 Sept 2024. By mid‑2026 it had received **30.48 lakh** suspect identifiers, shared **32.08 lakh** mule accounts and blocked transactions worth **Rs 25,698 crore**.
- CERT‑In continues to issue alerts, use AI for domain‑phishing detection and run an automated threat‑intelligence exchange platform.
- Under the CCPWC scheme, **Rs 132.93 crore** were released to states for setting up cyber‑forensic‑cum‑training labs, hiring junior cyber consultants and training over **24,600** law‑enforcement personnel, prosecutors and judges.
- The National‑Digital Investigation Support Centre in New Delhi has handled **14,064** cases, while a second centre in Assam became operational on 29 Aug 2025.
- Overall, **1,586** entities—including **40 foreign banks**—have been onboarded onto the CFCFRMS platform.
Important Facts
India’s cyber‑crime response is a shared responsibility. Police and public order are state subjects (Seventh Schedule), so state law‑enforcement agencies (LEAs) investigate, file FIRs and prosecute. The centre‑government supports them through advisories, financial aid and capacity‑building schemes like CCPWC.
Currently, **7 Central Forensic Science Laboratories** and **28 State Forensic Science Laboratories** (including Maharashtra) are operational, assisting in cyber‑crime investigations. Assistance has reached **20** states/UTs under the Nirbhaya‑funded DNA and cyber‑forensic capacity‑building scheme.
Exam Relevance
Understanding the institutional architecture of cyber‑crime governance is essential for GS II (Polity) and GS III (Economy & Technology). Candidates should note the division of powers (state vs centre), the role of specialised agencies like I4C, and the impact of financial‑technology safeguards on the economy.
The massive savings of **Rs 11,158 crore** illustrate how cyber‑security measures protect public wealth, a point relevant for questions on digital economy and governance.
Way Forward
To strengthen the ecosystem, states should fully adopt the SOP, ensure timely liaison with banks, and expand forensic labs in underserved regions. Continuous up‑skilling of LEAs and public awareness about the 1930 helpline will improve reporting rates. Enhancing AI‑driven monitoring by CERT‑In and integrating the Suspect Registry with banking APIs can further curb fraudulent transactions.
Regular parliamentary oversight and inter‑agency coordination will be key to sustaining the gains achieved by CFCFRMS 2.0.