The Supreme Court of India on Thursday, June 26, 2025, granted a significant interim stay on ongoing criminal proceedings against Anupam Mittal, founder of the popular matrimonial platform Shaadi.com. The relief comes in a case stemming from allegations of fraud committed by a user of the online service, where a woman claimed to have been defrauded of over ₹10 lakh.
A bench comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and Joymalya Bagchi passed the interim order while hearing Mittal’s challenge to a Telangana High Court order. The High Court had earlier refused to quash the case against him, deeming that the alleged offences carried sentences of less than seven years and thus merited further investigation.
The Core of the Allegations
The case originated from a complaint filed by a woman from Hyderabad. She alleged that a man, identified as Cherukuri Harsha (also known as Jogada Vamsikrishna), used a fake profile on Shaadi.com to pose as a prospective groom and subsequently defrauded her of more than ₹10 lakh. The complainant claimed the man made false promises and, when she sought repayment, threatened to morph and share her private photos online.
While Anupam Mittal was not named in the woman’s original complaint, he was later added as an accused during the police investigation. The central allegation against Mittal and Shaadi.com is a perceived failure in their duty to adequately verify the user’s identity before allowing him to interact with others on the platform, particularly given that the platform charges for premium services like “Select Shaadi.”
Shaadi.com’s Defense: An Intermediary Role
Appearing before the Supreme Court, Mittal’s counsel vehemently argued that the case against him was baseless and amounted to a misuse of the criminal process. They contended that Shaadi.com operates as an intermediary service, akin to classified matrimonial advertisements in newspapers, and therefore, cannot be held criminally liable for the independent and fraudulent actions of its users.
Mittal’s legal team also provided key details regarding the alleged fraudster’s profile. They submitted that the accused man had verified his profile using a mobile One-Time Password (OTP). However, he had opted not to upload any government-issued identification, a crucial fact that was clearly displayed on his profile for all users, including the complainant, to see.
Furthermore, Mittal’s counsel emphasized that the complainant chose to engage with the accused man outside the platform voluntarily. They also highlighted that Shaadi.com’s safety guidelines repeatedly warn users against sharing sensitive financial details or transferring money to other users, placing the onus of such off-platform interactions on the users themselves.
Supreme Court’s Intervention
Taking note of these detailed submissions, the Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to grant an interim stay on all further proceedings in the case. The apex court has also sought a response from the Telangana Police to thoroughly examine the allegations and provide justification for the decision to add Anupam Mittal as an accused in the ongoing investigation.
This intervention by the Supreme Court provides significant interim relief to Anupam Mittal and brings into sharp focus the legal liabilities of online intermediary platforms for the actions of their users. The case is now set to be further reviewed after the Telangana Police file their detailed response, potentially setting an important precedent for digital platforms in India.
Key Highlights:
- SC Stays Proceedings Against Anupam Mittal: The Supreme Court of India has granted an interim stay on criminal proceedings against Shaadi.com founder Anupam Mittal in a fraud case stemming from a user’s alleged actions.
- Case Details: A woman from Hyderabad claimed she was defrauded of over ₹10 lakh by a man she met on Shaadi.com; Mittal was later added as an accused for alleged failure to verify the user’s identity.
- Shaadi.com’s Defense: Mittal’s counsel argued that Shaadi.com is an intermediary, not liable for user actions, and highlighted that the accused had only mobile OTP verification (not government ID), which was disclosed, and the complainant engaged outside the platform despite safety warnings.
- Court Seeks Police Response: The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Telangana Police regarding the allegations and why Mittal was named as an accused, temporarily halting further action.