The Supreme Court of India has recently stayed the criminal proceedings against Anupam Mittal, the founder of Shaadi.com, in a high-profile cheating case. The case revolves around allegations that a user on the matrimonial platform defrauded a woman of over ₹10 lakh, raising serious questions about the platform’s verification processes and user safety protocols.
Background of the Case: Alleged Fraud on Shaadi.com
Earlier this year, a woman from Hyderabad filed a complaint after she was allegedly cheated by a man she met through Shaadi.com. The accused, posing as “Harsha Cherukuri,” claimed to be a US-based doctor’s son and convinced the woman to transfer ₹11 lakh, citing urgent financial troubles. When she demanded repayment, he allegedly threatened to morph and circulate her photos online unless she paid an additional ₹10 lakh.
Investigations revealed that the accused was actually Jogada Vamshi Krishna, a repeat cyber fraudster with over 20 similar cases across India. His profile photo was a stolen image of a politician, highlighting the severity of identity fraud on the platform.
Why Was Anupam Mittal Named in the Case?
Though Anupam Mittal was not initially named in the complaint, he was added as an accused during the investigation. The allegation is that Shaadi.com failed to adequately verify the identity of the user before allowing him to interact with others, especially under the “Select Shaadi” premium service, which promises verified matches and dedicated relationship managers.
Mittal defended the platform by stating that the accused had verified his profile through mobile OTP but chose not to upload any government ID. This lack of complete verification was visible on the profile, and the complainant had engaged with him outside the platform’s safety guidelines, which explicitly warn users against sharing financial details or transferring money.
Supreme Court’s Interim Relief: Stay on Proceedings
A Bench comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and Joymalya Bagchi granted an interim stay on the criminal proceedings against Mittal, responding to his challenge against the Telangana High Court’s refusal to quash the case. The stay means that the legal process against Mittal will be paused pending further hearings.
What This Means for Shaadi.com and Online Matrimonial Platforms
This case has sparked a wider debate about the responsibilities of online matrimonial platforms in India:
Verification and Safety: The incident exposes gaps in user verification, especially in premium services that charge extra for “verified” matches. Users expect a higher level of trust and security, which platforms must ensure.
User Awareness: Platforms like Shaadi.com warn users not to share financial information or transact money with other users. However, the effectiveness of these warnings depends on user education and vigilance.
Legal Accountability: The inclusion of founders and top executives in criminal cases highlights the increasing legal scrutiny on platform governance and accountability.
The Larger Context: Investor Disputes and Corporate Challenges
Separately, Shaadi.com has been embroiled in a long-running corporate dispute between Anupam Mittal and WestBridge Ventures, a major private equity investor. This dispute involves shareholder rights, arbitration jurisdiction, and potential changes in company control that could affect the platform’s future direction.
Lessons for Indian Startups and Users
For Startups: This case underscores the importance of robust KYC (Know Your Customer) and verification mechanisms, especially in sectors dealing with sensitive personal data and trust.
For Users: Always exercise caution, even on reputed platforms. Verify identities independently and avoid financial transactions with individuals met online.
Conclusion: Balancing Growth with Responsibility
The Supreme Court’s stay on the cheating case against Anupam Mittal provides temporary relief but also serves as a wake-up call for the entire online matchmaking industry. As digital platforms grow rapidly in India, ensuring user safety, transparency, and accountability is paramount. The outcome of this case will likely influence how matrimonial and dating platforms operate and regulate themselves in the future, reinforcing the need for stronger safeguards to protect millions of users seeking genuine connections.