Cyber Crime Statistics India: The Latest Official Numbers
Cyber crime statistics India: verified figures from MHA, I4C and NCRB, what each measures, and why complaints, FIRs, frozen and returned money never match.
In short
- Over 65.89 lakh financial-fraud complaints reached the national portal in 2021–2025, reporting losses above ₹55,050 crore (MHA, Lok Sabha, 21 Jul 2026).
- About ₹8,189 crore of that was lien-marked; a separate I4C figure puts money "saved" through CFCFRMS at ₹11,158 crore to 30 Jun 2026. Neither means returned.
- NCRB counts registered FIRs, not portal complaints, so its cyber crime totals are far lower and a year or more behind.
- RBI counts frauds that banks report to it, mostly above ₹1 lakh, which excludes most UPI scams.
- A number without a source, a date and a definition of what it counts is not a statistic. Treat it as a rumour.
Who this is for: Journalists, students, policy readers and anyone who has seen a cyber crime number in a headline and wants to know where it came from and what it means.
Most cyber crime statistics India readers encounter are either real numbers quoted without their definition, or estimates presented as counts. This page does the opposite. It lists the figures we have verified against a primary document, states the source and date for each, explains what the figure measures, and points you to the official report for anything we do not have.
Four institutions produce the numbers that matter: the Ministry of Home Affairs and its I4C unit, which run the complaint portal; the National Crime Records Bureau, which counts FIRs; the Reserve Bank, which counts bank-reported frauds; and CERT-In, which counts security incidents reported by organisations. They do not measure the same thing, and they should never be added together.
The verified cyber crime statistics for India
| Figure | What it measures | Source and date |
|---|---|---|
| 65.89 lakh+ | Financial-fraud complaints registered on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal and 1930, 2021 to 2025. Complaints, not cases. | MHA, Lok Sabha reply, 21 Jul 2026 |
| ₹55,050 crore+ | Amount complainants reported as lost in those complaints. Self-reported and unverified. | MHA, Lok Sabha reply, 21 Jul 2026 |
| ₹8,189 crore+ | Amount lien-marked (blocked in accounts) following those complaints. Not returned. | MHA, Lok Sabha reply, 21 Jul 2026 |
| ₹11,158 crore | Amount I4C describes as "saved" through CFCFRMS in 32.80 lakh+ complaints, cumulative to 30 Jun 2026. Frozen, not returned. | I4C / MHA, 2026 |
| 30,000+ | Digital-arrest complaints in 2025, as reported in the press citing I4C. Secondary reporting; verify against the latest MHA reply. | Press reports citing I4C, 2026 |
Read the two money figures together. Of the ₹55,050 crore reported lost, ₹8,189 crore was lien-marked, by the MHA's own reply. That is a blocking rate of roughly one rupee in seven, and blocking is only the first step before any refund. (Source: MHA, Lok Sabha unstarred question 251, 21 July 2026.)
The I4C "saved" figure of ₹11,158 crore covers a different period and a different count of complaints, so it should not be compared directly with the ₹8,189 crore in the Lok Sabha table. Both describe money frozen in the system. How the freeze works, and why "frozen is not returned", is explained in our CFCFRMS explainer.
Which report measures what
Before using any number, find its row in this table. A complaint count and an FIR count can differ by a factor of ten or more for the same year, and both are correct.
| Source | Unit counted | Who reports it | Lag | Where to look |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCRP / 1930 (I4C, MHA) | Complaints filed by citizens; reported amounts; amounts lien-marked | Victims, through the portal and helpline | Months; figures appear in parliamentary replies and PIB releases | mha.gov.in and sansad.in, search "cyber fraud" replies |
| NCRB Crime in India | FIRs registered under IT Act and BNS/IPC sections with a cyber element, by state, city and motive | State police, through CCTNS | A year or more; the latest edition at the time of writing covers 2023 | ncrb.gov.in, Crime in India, cyber crimes chapter |
| RBI Annual Report | Frauds reported by banks, by category including card and internet, by number and amount | Banks, under RBI fraud reporting rules, mostly for ₹1 lakh and above | Annual, published around May | rbi.org.in, Annual Report, chapter on regulation and supervision, frauds table |
| CERT-In | Security incidents reported to or handled by CERT-In (phishing, intrusions, ransomware, defacements) | Organisations, under the 2022 directions | Annual report; counts also quoted in MeitY parliamentary replies | cert-in.org.in, annual reports |
| NPCI | UPI transaction volumes and values, not fraud | The payment network itself | Monthly | npci.org.in, UPI product statistics |
Two of these deserve their own guides: how to read NCRB cyber crime data, and what RBI fraud statistics do and do not cover.
Three distinctions that stop you being misled
Complaints are not FIRs
A portal complaint is a record created by the victim in minutes. An FIR is a document a police officer registers after deciding a cognisable offence is disclosed. Most portal complaints never become FIRs, for reasons ranging from small amounts to the victim not following up. So when a headline says "cyber crime rose" using portal data and another says it fell using NCRB, both can be true. The national portal count is the better measure of how many people were targeted; the NCRB count is the better measure of what the police system processed.
Frozen is not returned
Every "saved" and "lien-marked" figure describes money blocked in a bank account after a 1930 alert. Getting it back to the victim requires an order from a magistrate, typically under BNSS section 503, and the bank's compliance. No official source we have found publishes a national figure for money actually returned. If someone quotes one, ask for the document.
Reported is not verified
The ₹55,050 crore is what complainants typed in. Some will be overstated, some understated, some withdrawn, and a few will be payment disputes rather than crime. It is still the best available indicator of the scale of harm, provided it is quoted as "reported losses".
What the numbers say about who is being hit
The portal data is dominated by financial fraud, and within that by scams where the victim was persuaded to pay rather than hacked: fake trading platforms, digital arrest calls, task scams and loan-app extortion. The press-reported digital-arrest figure of 30,000-plus complaints in 2025 is a fraction of total complaints, but the amount per case is often far higher than for a UPI scam, which is why the category draws so much attention. Our digital arrest statistics post looks at what that figure does and does not tell us. For the broader picture of 2025 and the policy response that followed, including the Supreme Court's reported direction of 29 July 2026 on a standalone offence, see our year in review.
NCRB's motive tables consistently show fraud as the leading motive behind registered cyber FIRs, followed by sexual exploitation and extortion. The numbers themselves are in Crime in India; the state and city rankings, and the reasons they mislead, are in our post on state wise cyber crime rankings.
How to cite cyber crime statistics for India correctly
Before you quote a number
- Name the document: a Lok Sabha reply with its date and question number, an NCRB edition, an RBI Annual Report year.
- Say what it counts: complaints, FIRs, bank-reported frauds, incidents, or transaction volumes.
- Say the period: calendar years for the portal and NCRB, financial years for RBI.
- Use "reported" for losses, "lien-marked" or "frozen" for blocked money, and "returned" only with a source.
- Never add numbers from two rows of the table above.
The primary documents are short. The MHA reply of 21 July 2026 is a few pages with a table. The NCRB Crime in India landing page lists every edition. The I4C site describes the systems behind the counts. Read the table before the press release about it, and if you have been a victim yourself, the numbers matter less than the first hour: our reporting guide and fraud response service start there.
Frequently asked questions
How many cyber crimes happen in India every year?
Nobody knows, and no official source claims to. The portal counts complaints people choose to file, NCRB counts FIRs police choose to register, and RBI counts frauds banks are required to report. Each is a floor. The most useful single number is the portal complaint count from MHA parliamentary replies, read alongside its own caveats.
Is the ₹55,050 crore figure the amount Indians lost?
It is the amount complainants reported losing in financial-fraud complaints on the national portal between 2021 and 2025, per the MHA Lok Sabha reply of 21 July 2026. It is self-reported and unverified, it excludes people who never filed, and some complaints are later withdrawn or found to be disputes rather than fraud. Quote it as "reported", never as "lost".
What is the difference between lien-marked, frozen, saved and returned?
Lien-marked and frozen both mean a bank has blocked an amount in an account after a 1930 alert. "Saved" is the term I4C uses for the same thing. Returned means a court or bank has actually paid the money back to the victim, which requires a separate process and happens in a minority of cases. The gap between the two is the number nobody publishes.
Where do I find the latest numbers myself?
Search mha.gov.in and sansad.in for Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha replies on "cyber fraud" or "cyber crime"; the monsoon and winter sessions usually carry updated tables. NCRB's Crime in India is at ncrb.gov.in. RBI's Annual Report is on rbi.org.in. I4C occasionally publishes figures through PIB releases.
Why does NCRB show far fewer cyber crimes than the portal?
Because the portal counts every complaint, including ones never investigated, while NCRB counts only cases where an FIR was registered under the IT Act or BNS sections with a cyber element. A portal complaint may be registered in one year and the FIR in the next, and most complaints never become FIRs at all.
Are there reliable state-wise numbers?
Two kinds. NCRB gives registered cyber FIRs by state and by metro city, with a crime rate per lakh population. MHA replies sometimes annex portal complaints by state. The two rankings differ because registration practices differ. Our state-wise post explains how to read both without being misled.
If you want help with this
- Online financial fraud response · Money gone through UPI, net-banking, card or wallet. We get the complaint, bank dispute and regulator escalation right, in the order and at the speed that gives frozen money a chance.
- Leadership and board cyber-risk briefing with ransomware tabletop · training · A three-hour briefing for founders, directors and CXOs that explains cyber risk in business terms and then runs a ransomware tabletop in which the leadership team makes the real decisions.
Keep reading
State-Wise Cyber Crime Ranking From NCRB Data, Explained
Which state has the most cyber crime depends on whether you count FIRs or complaints, totals or rates. Here is how to open the right NCRB ta...
NCRB Cyber Crime Data: How to Read Crime in India Correctly
NCRB says tens of thousands of cyber crimes a year; the 1930 system says tens of lakhs of complaints. Both are right. Here is how to read th...
Cyber Crime Against Women in India: NCRB Statistics
NCRB publishes a dedicated table on cyber crimes against women. It is useful, it is a year late, and it counts a fraction of what happens. H...
Cyber Crime in India 2025: The Year in Review
2025 was the year digital arrest became a household phrase, the new criminal codes finished their first year, and the portal passed cumulati...