HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court has ruled that Shaadi.com’s director and staff must cooperate with the investigation into a fraudulent case involving a fake profile on the matrimonial site. The court declined to quash the FIR against them and issued instructions to proceed with the probe.
Justice N. Tukaramji, hearing petitions filed by the accused on Thursday, dismissed their plea to cancel the FIR registered by Jubilee Hills police. The case revolves around a deceptive profile uploaded using the photo of a Yanam MLA, which led to a woman doctor from Jubilee Hills falling victim to a sophisticated marriage scam.
The accused, Cherukuri Harsha alias Jogada Vamsikrishna from Rajamahendravaram, created the fake profile and engaged with the victim, claiming his mother was a doctor in the United States and that he wished to marry her. Over time, he extracted nearly ₹11 lakh under the pretext that his bank accounts had been frozen by the IT department.
When the woman demanded her money back, Harsha allegedly threatened her with morphed images and extortion, demanding an additional ₹10 lakh and threatening her and her family’s safety. She subsequently filed a complaint at the Jubilee Hills police station.
Investigations revealed that Harsha had duped others in Bengaluru and Mumbai, including one victim who lost ₹27 lakh. Based on the evidence, police named Shaadi.com director Anupam Mittal, Tamil Nadu team leader Vignesh, and Bengaluru-based manager Satish Nanayya as co-accused in the FIR filed on February 25.
The petitioners argued that Shaadi.com merely provides a digital platform for profiles and does not verify individual entries. Advocate G. Ashok Reddy, appearing for the petitioners, said the platform cannot be held accountable for third-party misuse.
However, Additional Public Prosecutor Jitender Veeramalla countered this, stating that users engage with Shaadi.com based on its credibility and trust. He asserted that the platform must bear responsibility when financial transactions occur through its services and argued that profiles must be verified before money is exchanged.
The judge concluded that the investigation must proceed, and directed issuance of notices under BNS Section 35(3). He instructed police to summon the team leader and manager, and stated that the director should also appear if required. The petitions seeking to dismiss the FIR were subsequently closed.
