NRI credit card fraud: jurisdiction and enforcement

By Advocate Panchanand Shaw, Bar Council of West Bengal · Published 4 Nov 2026 · Cyber law

A credit card fraud against an NRI has two distinct problems: deciding which court in India can hear the case, and reaching a wrongdoer who may be in another country. On the first, the position is generally favourable. Where the card was issued by an Indian bank, the account is maintained in India, or the transaction was processed through an Indian payment system, Indian courts and Indian authorities will ordinarily have jurisdiction, and an NRI does not lose the remedy merely by being abroad. On the second, enforcement against a person outside India is possible but slow, treaty-dependent and never guaranteed, and it should not be the only remedy relied on.

The most reliable recovery route for an NRI is not the criminal case at all. It is the bank's own obligation to reverse an unauthorised transaction under the RBI directions of 6 July 2017 on limiting customer liability, enforced through the bank's grievance process, the RBI Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, or a consumer commission under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. That route does not require the fraudster to be traced. The criminal complaint and any suit against the wrongdoer run alongside it.

Which courts have jurisdiction

Jurisdiction in a criminal case follows the place where the offence was committed, and Indian courts also entertain cases where the consequences of a cyber offence were felt. For an NRI cardholder the connecting factors are usually the card issuer's branch, the bank account that was debited, and the payment infrastructure through which the transaction passed. Because the offence is often committed from a computer located elsewhere, the practical answer is that more than one court may be competent, and the choice is made on the facts. The place-of-trial provisions of the BNSS govern this, and the point is fact-specific rather than automatic. On the civil side, a suit lies where the defendant resides or where the cause of action arose, and a consumer complaint lies where the complainant resides or works, which makes the consumer route convenient for an NRI.

Filing a complaint from abroad

1. Report to the bank first, in writing. Email and the bank's app work from abroad, and the written complaint fixes the date that starts the RBI reporting windows.
2. File a cyber crime complaint online. The national cyber crime portal accepts complaints from anywhere and generates a reference number; the 1930 helpline itself operates within India.
3. Give a power of attorney to a trusted representative in India. A relative or a lawyer can then file an FIR under section 173 of the BNSS on your behalf and follow up locally.
4. If the police refuse to register the FIR, an application can be made to the Magistrate under section 175(3) of the BNSS for a direction to investigate.
5. Escalate the bank claim separately, through the nodal officer and then the Ombudsman or a consumer commission, which can be filed electronically.
6. Preserve everything, including statements, alerts and the bank's replies, and get them authenticated if they are to be used abroad.

The bank refund route for an NRI

An NRI cardholder is entitled to the same treatment as a resident customer of the same bank. The RBI directions on limiting customer liability apply to the card issuer, not to the customer's place of residence, so the zero liability and capped liability rules apply unchanged. The three-working-day and four-to-seven-working-day windows run from the bank's communication to the customer, and an NRI in a different time zone should still act on the alert as soon as it is received, because the windows are counted in the bank's working days rather than the customer's. A consumer complaint can be filed by an authorised representative, and the e-Daakhil portal allows electronic filing, which removes much of the practical difficulty of distance.

Enforcing against a wrongdoer abroad

Where the person who committed the fraud is outside India, enforcement becomes a question of cooperation between states. India has extradition arrangements with a number of countries, and the process is governed by the Extradition Act, 1962 and the relevant treaty. Two features limit it. Extradition generally requires dual criminality, meaning the conduct must be an offence in both countries, and it requires the offence to carry a sufficient punishment in Indian law, so a charge that is triable only as a minor offence may not qualify. Extradition is also slow and discretionary, and a request may be refused. Mutual legal assistance treaties and letters rogatory can be used to obtain evidence located abroad, through the designated central authority, but they too are slow. The practical point is that a criminal case against an overseas wrongdoer should not be the cardholder's only plan, and recovery should be pursued wherever the wrongdoer holds assets a court can reach.

An NRI as an accused

The position reverses where an NRI is himself accused. Indian courts can proceed against a person who is abroad, and where an FIR is registered the accused should seek anticipatory bail under section 482 of the BNSS before the Court of Session or the High Court, rather than arriving in India without protection. Courts routinely impose conditions that the accused surrender the passport, remain in the jurisdiction for the investigation, and appear on every date; leaving India against those conditions invites cancellation of bail. Residence abroad is not, by itself, a bar to obtaining bail, but it makes the flight-risk objection stronger and the application harder, so it must be met with material showing stable ties, cooperation and, where possible, restitution.

Scenario, forum and what it can achieve

What decides the outcome

• Where the connecting factors lie. The card issuer, the debited account and the payment route determine jurisdiction.
• Promptness of the report. The RBI windows and the strength of the bank claim turn on when the bank was notified.
• Whether the wrongdoer can be found. Enforcement abroad depends on the treaty position and on where the assets are held.
• Quality of evidence. Statements, alerts and the bank's replies must be preserved and, if used abroad, properly authenticated.
• Cooperation between agencies. Success in cross-border cases depends heavily on the central authority and the counterpart state.

Multi-country fact patterns

Most NRI card frauds are not confined to one country. The card is issued in India, the cardholder is in Dubai or Toronto, the merchant or the skimming device is in a third country, and the money lands in a fourth. That spread creates a genuine problem of proof and of enforcement. For jurisdiction it almost always helps the cardholder, because Indian courts accept that the consequences of the offence were felt in India where the account was debited. For enforcement it almost always hurts, because no single authority has an interest in the whole chain. The cardholder should therefore treat the Indian bank and the Indian payment system as the practical anchor of the case, and the overseas elements as a separate, slower track that may or may not yield a result.

Reporting from a different time zone

Time zones create a trap in the RBI framework. The three-working-day and four-to-seven-working-day windows are counted in the working days of the customer's home branch, and they run from the date the bank communicates the unauthorised transaction, excluding that date. An NRI who reads an alert overnight and replies the next morning is still well within the window; an NRI who reads it during a holiday period and waits for the next visit to India may not be. The safest practice is to acknowledge the alert in writing the same day it is received, using email, so that the reply is dated and traceable regardless of the time difference.

Preserving evidence for use abroad

Documents that will be relied on in India and possibly abroad should be collected and preserved early. Bank statements can usually be downloaded, but the internal records that matter most, such as merchant logs, authentication records and internet protocol logs, are held by the bank or the payment processor and are retained only for limited periods. A written request for their preservation, sent promptly, gives the bank notice that the records are in issue. Where the evidence is electronic, section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 governs admissibility, and section 63(4) sets out what the certificate accompanying the record must contain; that certificate should be obtained from the custodian of the record when the record is collected. For an NRI, doing this early, through a representative in India, avoids the situation where the trail has gone cold by the time the case is filed.

Costs and practicality

A cross-border fraud case has a cost that should be weighed against the loss. Chasing an overseas wrongdoer through extradition or mutual legal assistance is rarely proportionate to a modest card loss, and the agencies involved will prioritise serious and organised cases. The bank claim, by contrast, is inexpensive: a written complaint, an Ombudsman filing and, if needed, a consumer complaint that can be filed electronically. Where the loss is small, the sensible strategy is to recover from the bank under the RBI directions and let the criminal side run its course without further investment. Where the loss is large, or where the cardholder can identify assets in India, a civil remedy and a focused criminal complaint are worth the cost.

Common mistakes

• Waiting until a visit to India to complain. The RBI windows and limitation run from the event, not from the visit.
• Assuming the criminal case recovers the money. Punishment and recovery are separate, and restitution is not automatic.
• Relying only on extradition. It is slow and discretionary, and the civil and bank routes are usually faster.
• Ignoring the bank's obligation. The safest recovery is the reversal the bank must make on its own.
• Acting as an accused without anticipatory bail. Arriving in India to answer an FIR without protection is a serious risk.

When to involve a lawyer

Cross-border card fraud involves two legal systems, several agencies and a deadline that starts running the moment the bank sends its alert. A lawyer in India can file on your behalf under a power of attorney, manage the FIR, the bank claim and any consumer complaint, and advise on whether enforcement against a person abroad is realistic. Whether you are an NRI cardholder seeking recovery or an NRI accused of a card offence, take advice before the first procedural step rather than after it. For assistance in Kolkata and West Bengal, see our cyber law practice or reach us through contact; for bail matters, see the bail material.

Frequently asked questions

Information for general guidance only and not legal advice. Provisions cited follow the Information Technology Act 2000, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.

Related articles

• UPI fraud against an NRI: jurisdiction and enforcement
• Jurisdiction in credit card fraud cases: where to file
• Which police station handles credit card fraud in Kolkata
• What to do in the first 24 hours after credit card fraud
• Time limit to file a credit card fraud complaint
• Evidence checklist for credit card fraud cases

Cyber crime lawyer in your city · Bank account freeze help · Contact