--- title: "Intermediaries, evidence and search, Ernakulam" description: "Intermediaries, evidence and search: 24 matters, each with the law, forum, procedure, documents and limitation. Domain / website blocking – Sec 69A IT Act…" url: "https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/" image: "https://advaslam.com/og.png" --- Cyber fraud, freeze & takedown # Intermediaries, evidence and search 24 matters from the Cyber fraud, freeze & takedown index. Each entry sets out the problem, the law, the forum, the procedure, the documents usually needed and the limitation clock. General information only — verify the current position on your facts before acting. **Contents** 1. Domain / website blocking – Sec 69A IT Act route (procedure information) 2. INDRP / UDRP – look-alike domain (bankname-support.in) used for fraud 3. Social-media account ban / shadow-ban challenge – creator/business page disabled 4. BSA 63 certificate drafting – dual certificates (custodian + system/process) 5. Police seizure without memo/hash – phone/laptop taken, no paper given 6. Article 20(3) – password / biometric / decryption demand during search 7. FSL – phone / hard-disk / CCTV forensic examination request (Kerala) 8. Cloud data / Gmail / Drive / WhatsApp-backup disclosure – MLAT vs platform channel 9. FSL-direction writ – device/FSL/report pending, trial or lien stuck 10. Platform grievance → GAC → court escalation bundle (Rule 3 / 3A) 11. Intermediary safe-harbour note – IT 79 due-diligence relevance 12. Search of office/home in cyber case – BNSS 185 + 105 compliance checklist 13. CDR / IPDR / TSP disclosure request – who can ask, how long retained 14. Bank-statement / UPI-switch proof – BSA 63 pair for money trail 15. CCTV / ATM footage preservation – overwrite-risk letter drafting 16. App-permission / APK forensics – smishing-APK examination questions 17. Voice / call-recording proof – vishing audio + transcript + BSA 63 18. Hash / chain-of-custody note – one-page format for every device 19. Cross-border fraud – server/admin outside India, victim in Kerala 20. Emergency disclosure – imminent-harm request (threat / NCII spread) 21. Gag / media-restraint prayer where investigation or victim-privacy at stake 22. Costs / compensation for illegal search or data loss by custodian 23. Record-retention for cyber file – what to keep for 6 years 24. When to brief High Court counsel – cyber-matter triage (High Court-primary) ## Domain / website blocking – Sec 69A IT Act route (procedure information) Phishing/fake-bank/defamatory site persists after reporting. What it involvesStatutory blocking through designated process, not private request. Relevant lawIT 69A (grounds: sovereignty, defence, security, foreign relations, public order, incitement – defamation alone is not one) + IT (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009; IT 79 safe-harbour context. ForumOrganisation's Nodal Officer (e.g., State nodal officer) → MeitY Designated Officer + committee; court-order route (r.10); platform grievance first. Procedure & stageGrievance tickets → complaint to the Nodal Officer with URLs/headers (Designated Officer takes no direct complaints – r.6(3)) → committee + hearing notice (r.7–8) → Secretary's approval → direction to intermediary. RemedyAccess-blocking; parallel FIR/injunction continues. High Court connectionHC writs test 69A compliance (necessity, hearing, review, confidentiality) – plead Rule steps. Documents normally requiredURLs, headers, tickets, FIR/NCRP, harm note. LimitationNo fixed period to apply – grievance first; Nodal Officer's request to be decided within 7 working days (Blocking Rules r.11). **Related:** INDRP/UDRP; platform bans. **HC orders block directly?** Generally through statutory process – HC directs consideration. ## INDRP / UDRP – look-alike domain (bankname-support.in) used for fraud Deceptive domain harvests credentials; registrar slow. What it involvesArbitration for bad-faith deceptive registration + parallel crime. Relevant lawINDRP (.in) / UDRP (gTLD) policy + registrar terms; BNS 318/319 + IT 66D for crime track. ForumNIXI/INDRP arbitrator or WIPO/UDRP provider; Cyber PS for crime. Procedure & stageWHOIS preservation → complaint (confusing similarity + no right + bad faith) → lock/transfer/cancel; FIR parallel. RemedyTransfer/cancellation; prosecution continues. High Court connectionHC civil/injunction support where deceptive domain + trademark overlap. Documents normally requiredWHOIS, site captures with time, trademark proof, FIR/tickets, BSA 63. LimitationNo filing deadline in the INDRP/UDRP policy texts – preserve WHOIS/site captures now; domain transfer is locked only once a proceeding is pending. **Related:** Phishing-header; BEC. **Faster – crime or domain case?** Both – crime freezes money, domain case removes lure. ## Social-media account ban / shadow-ban challenge – creator/business page disabled Business page disabled for "policy" with appeal pending; livelihood hit. What it involvesContract + Rule 3(1)/4(8) notice-and-dispute process for SSMI own-accord action. Relevant lawIT Rules Rule 4(8) (prior notice + dispute + RGO oversight for SSMI own-accord removal); IT 79; contract. ForumPlatform appeal → Grievance Officer → GAC (Rule 3A, 30 days) → civil court/HC per maintainability. Procedure & stageAppeal with ID/business proof; RGO escalation; GAC within 30 days; suit/writ per respondent nature. RemedyRestoration + reasons; damages only on contract track. High Court connectionWrit vs private platform is maintainability-sensitive – plead public-function/state-action only where arguable; else civil suit. Documents normally requiredBan notice, appeal tickets, business-loss note, GAC filing. LimitationGAC – 30 days from the Grievance Officer's communication (r.3A(3)). **Related:** Grievance; injunction. **HC restores page?** Rare directly – record of Rule 4(8)/GAC exhaustion decides. ## BSA 63 certificate drafting – dual certificates (custodian + system/process) Electronic record objected as secondary/unproved at trial. What it involvesTwo-track proof – account/custody source + device/process integrity. Relevant lawBSA 63 (admissibility of electronic records – certificate signed by person in charge and an expert, in Schedule form: Part A party, Part B expert, each with hash). ForumIO filing → trial court. Procedure & stagePart A – party/person in charge of the device or source (device details, lawful control, hash); Part B – expert (source details, hash + hash report); link by covering memo. RemedyAdmissibility; avoids re-trial proof gap. High Court connectionHC appeal/revision turns on this pair. Documents normally requiredExtract + hash note + two BSA 63 drafts + covering memo. LimitationBSA 63 certificate with the record each time it is submitted for admission (s.63(4)); prepare with the record. **Related:** Preservation; FSL. **One bank seal enough?** No – BSA 63(4) certificate is signed by the person in charge and an expert (Schedule Parts A and B). ## Police seizure without memo/hash – phone/laptop taken, no paper given Device taken "for check"; no seizure memo, no hash, no copy. What it involvesBNSS 105/106 compliance – memo + AV recording + hash + copy where feasible. Relevant lawBNSS 106 (seizure + report to Magistrate); BNSS 105 (AV recording of search/seizure); BSA 63 downstream. ForumIO → jurisdictional Magistrate; revision/HC on illegality. Procedure & stageWritten request for memo/hash/105 video ref + 106 court-report number; Magistrate application for copy/release. RemedyDirection for compliance/copy/release; exclusion weight at trial. High Court connectionHC revision/writ on illegal search/seizure after Magistrate record. Documents normally requiredSeizure date/time note, witness note, written requests, Magistrate application. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – request memo/hash/106 report immediately; Magistrate application promptly. **Related:** Art 20(3); FSL. **Refuse to give phone?** Do not obstruct – ask for memo/hash/receipt and note objections in writing. ## Article 20(3) – password / biometric / decryption demand during search IO asks for password/fingerprint/face to open phone; fears self-incrimination. What it involvesTestimonial vs physical-evidence line; compulsion limits. Relevant lawConstitution Art 20(3); BNSS 105/106, 185; IT 69 (decryption only on a direction by an authorised Central/State Government officer; s.69(3) assistance duty). ForumIO; Magistrate for direction; HC on compulsion question. Procedure & stageSeek written direction; counsel present; biometrics vs password distinction noted; challenge before Magistrate/HC where compulsion alleged. RemedyRegulated access; protection against compelled testimony. High Court connectionHC-primary – compulsion and admissibility arguments. Documents normally requiredWritten demand, device ownership note, Magistrate/HC filings. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – seek written direction at the search stage; challenge before Magistrate/HC promptly. **Related:** Seizure-memo; cloud-MLAT. **Must share password on spot?** Ask for written order and take advice – do not destroy or alter. ## FSL – phone / hard-disk / CCTV forensic examination request (Kerala) Device with IO for months; no mirror/hash/FSL movement. What it involvesImaging + hash + tool-examination + opinion. Relevant lawBNSS 106/105; BSA 63 + BSA 39 (expert opinion; 39(2) Examiner of Electronic Evidence under IT 79A). ForumIO → FSL → trial court. Procedure & stageWritten FSL request with questions (authenticity, morph, malware, timeline); hash-noted imaging; opinion + BSA 63 chain. RemedyAdmissible forensic opinion; de-freeze/release parallel. High Court connectionHC direction for time-bound FSL where trial/lien stalls. Documents normally requiredDevice details, hash note, question list, IO letters, 105 memo. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – FSL request with questions at forwarding; follow up in writing. **Related:** Seizure; cloud. **Private lab report enough?** IO/FSL chain is stronger for trial. ## Cloud data / Gmail / Drive / WhatsApp-backup disclosure – MLAT vs platform channel Data on foreign server; IO says "no jurisdiction". What it involvesDomestic production + platform law-enforcement channel + MLAT where needed. Relevant lawBNSS 94/185 production/search; IT 75 extra-territorial; MLAT executive channel; IT 79/r.3(1)(j) (72-hr assistance on written order). ForumIO → platform LE channel → MHA/MLAT where foreign compulsion. Procedure & stagePreservation request (fast) → production order → MLAT (slow) – run in that order. RemedyPreservation + disclosure for trial. High Court connectionHC status-direction where preservation lapses for want of request. Documents normally requiredAccount IDs, preservation tickets, IO orders, MLAT ref. LimitationPreservation windows are short – request in days. **Related:** FSL; BSA 63. **Victim requests Google directly?** Victim gets own data; suspect/third-party needs IO channel. ## FSL-direction writ – device/FSL/report pending, trial or lien stuck FSL pendency blocks charge/return of device/money. What it involvesTime-bound examination/report/return prayer without dictating opinion. Relevant lawBNSS 106 (seizure report), 193 (police report on completion); Art 226. ForumHigh Court of Kerala (after Magistrate representation). Procedure & stageIO/FSL representations → Magistrate note → writ with paper-book. RemedyDirection to examine/report/consider release – not a finding on merits. High Court connectionCore HC-primary forensic writ. Documents normally requiredSeizure memo, FSL forwarding, reminders, Magistrate application. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – writ after Magistrate representation; move promptly as trial/lien stalls. **Related:** De-freeze; revision. **HC orders FSL result?** Direction to act time-bound, not dictated opinion. ## Platform grievance → GAC → court escalation bundle (Rule 3 / 3A) Counterfeit/abuse complaint closed with template reply. What it involvesThree-rung record – officer → appellate → court. Relevant lawIT Rules Rule 3(2) + Rule 3A GAC (30-day appeal, 30-day disposal) + Rule 4(8) where SSMI own-accord. IT Rules clocks (as amended by G.S.R. 120(E) dated 10.02.2026, w.e.f. 20.02.2026): ack 24 hrs; disposal 7 days (r.3(2)(a)(i)); 36-hr removal (proviso r.3(2)(a)(i)); 3-hr removal on court/government order (r.3(1)(d)); 2-hr intimate-image/impersonation (r.3(2)(b)); 72-hr assistance on written order (r.3(1)(j)). ForumGrievance Officer → GAC → civil/criminal court/HC. Procedure & stageURL-wise tickets → reasoned appeal → court with both orders. RemedyRemoval/restoration direction + prosecution/injunction per track. High Court connectionExhaustion record decides writ maintainability. Documents normally requiredTickets, officer order, GAC appeal/order, URL bundle. LimitationGAC appeal 30 days; GAC disposal endeavour 30 days. **Related:** Injunction; 69A. **Skip GAC to court?** Courts ask why statutory appeal was bypassed. ## Intermediary safe-harbour note – IT 79 due-diligence relevance Platform says "we are only intermediary". What it involvesProtection depends on due-diligence + expeditious action on actual knowledge/court/government notice. Relevant lawIT 79 (safe harbour only with due diligence and expeditious removal on actual knowledge/government notification – s.79(2)(c), 79(3)(b)); Rules 3–4 due diligence. ForumIO/court appreciation; HC in takedown/writ. Procedure & stageServe court/government-grade notice + Rule 3(2) ticket; preserve non-action. RemedyLoss of safe-harbour argument; direction to act. High Court connectionHC tests 79 in blocking/takedown writs. Documents normally requiredNotices, tickets, non-action log, harm note. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – notice + Rule 3(2) ticket before/at filing; preserve non-action log. **Related:** 69A; injunction. **Notice in comments enough?** No – grievance-page + written notice with URLs. ## Search of office/home in cyber case – BNSS 185 + 105 compliance checklist Search without witnesses/video; staff phones imaged. What it involvesAuthority + witness + AV + memo + hash + copy. Relevant lawBNSS 185 (search by police), BNSS 105 (AV), BNSS 106 (seizure report). ForumIO → Magistrate; challenge via Magistrate/revision/HC. Procedure & stageNote authority, witnesses, video ref, memo, hash, copy request – contemporaneously. RemedyCompliance direction; evidentiary weight at trial. High Court connectionHC on illegal-search plea after Magistrate record. Documents normally requiredSearch note, memo copy, hash, representation. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – note compliance contemporaneously; challenge after Magistrate record. **Related:** Seizure-memo; Art 20(3). **Stop search?** Do not obstruct – record objections in writing. ## CDR / IPDR / TSP disclosure request – who can ask, how long retained Victim asks TSP directly; refused for "privacy". What it involvesIO/court channel for call/data records; retention limits. Relevant lawBNSS 94 production/185 search; BSA 63 for proof. ForumIO → TSP; Magistrate/court direction. Procedure & stageFIR → IO requisition with numbers/period → TSP disclosure → BSA 63 certificate. RemedyAttribution (SIM-swap, vishing, mule linkage). High Court connectionHC direction where TSP awaits format/order and trail ages. Documents normally requiredNumbers, period note, FIR, IO requisition, disclosure + BSA 63. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – IO requisition promptly while records are available. **Related:** SIM-swap; preservation. **Victim gets CDR?** Own billing details yes; others' records via IO/court. ## Bank-statement / UPI-switch proof – BSA 63 pair for money trail Trail printouts doubted as unsigned/unproved. What it involvesStatement + switch-log + dual certificates. Relevant lawBSA 63; BNSS 106 report linkage. ForumIO → trial court; de-freeze Magistrate. Procedure & stageCertified statement + UTR-switch extract + custodian + system certs + hop-table. RemedyProved trail; faster lien/release decisions. High Court connectionHC reads this bundle first in freeze writs. Documents normally requiredStatements, switch extracts, BSA 63 pair, hop-table. LimitationBSA 63 pair at filing; certified statements promptly. **Related:** Lien; CIBIL-next. **Passbook copy enough?** Certified + BSA 63 is stronger. ## CCTV / ATM footage preservation – overwrite-risk letter drafting Bank/shop says "footage auto-deletes in 7 days". What it involvesSame-day preservation request via IO + parallel civil preservation note. Relevant lawBNSS 106/105; BSA 63 for footage proof. ForumIO; Magistrate for direction; civil court for preservation where parallel suit. Procedure & stageWritten request with camera ID/date/hour + IO endorsement; hash-noted copy + BSA 63. RemedyPreserved identity/presence proof. High Court connectionHC direction where custodian erases after notice. Documents normally requiredRequest letters, camera/time note, copy + BSA 63. LimitationOverwrite risk – preservation letter same day; no fixed statutory period. **Related:** Evidence; FSL. **Photo of screen enough?** Original file + certificate is stronger. ## App-permission / APK forensics – smishing-APK examination questions APK deleted after reset; lender link gone. What it involvesSender-link, permission-abuse and exfiltration-opinion questions. Relevant lawIT 66, 43; BSA 39 expert opinion + BSA 63. ForumIO → FSL. Procedure & stagePreserve link/sender/APK file; question list – permissions, SMS-forward, C2, data-exfil. RemedyAttribution + compensation support. High Court connectionForensic-direction writ where device sits idle. Documents normally requiredLink, APK, permission screens, device, question list. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – preserve link/APK at once; FSL question list with forwarding. **Related:** Smishing; ransomware. **Reset phone?** Only after IO imaging. ## Voice / call-recording proof – vishing audio + transcript + BSA 63 Recording labelled edited; transcript doubted. What it involvesOriginal + transcript + voice-comparison where needed. Relevant lawBSA 63 (recording) + BSA 39 expert voice opinion; BNSS 105 where IO-recorded. ForumIO → trial court. Procedure & stageOriginal file + hash + transcript + custodian cert; FSL voice where disputed. RemedyAdmissible inducement proof (OTP/vishing). High Court connectionHC bail/quash courts test inducement prima facie on this. Documents normally requiredOriginal audio, transcript, BSA 63, FSL request where needed. LimitationBSA 63 + transcript with the recording at filing; no fixed statutory period. **Related:** OTP; vishing. **Recorded without telling – admissible?** Legality vs admissibility is court-tested – preserve original either way. ## Hash / chain-of-custody note – one-page format for every device Devices change hands without paper; hash mismatch alleged. What it involvesSingle custody sheet – seizure → seal → hash → movement → FSL → return. Relevant lawBNSS 105/106; BSA 63 chain. ForumIO file → court. Procedure & stageFill at each handoff; photograph seal; re-hash on open. RemedyWithstands tampering allegation. High Court connectionHC evidentiary challenge turns on this sheet. Documents normally requiredCustody sheet, hash logs, seal photos. LimitationFill the custody sheet at each handoff; re-hash on open; no fixed statutory period. **Related:** Seizure; FSL. **Hash needed for phone?** Yes – re-opening without re-hash invites dispute. ## Cross-border fraud – server/admin outside India, victim in Kerala Admin IDs foreign; platform slow; police cite limits. What it involvesIT 75 + preservation + platform LE + MLAT sequencing. Relevant lawIT 75 (extra-territorial); BNSS/MLAT procedure; IT 69A where blocking needed. ForumKerala IO → nodal → MHA/MLAT; platform LE channel parallel. Procedure & stagePreserve → domestic freeze/lock → platform disclosure → MLAT for compulsion. RemedyPartial (domestic freeze/takedown) + long-track MLAT. High Court connectionHC direction for preservation + status where domestic leg stalls. Documents normally requiredIDs/URLs/TX list, preservation tickets, MLAT ref. LimitationPreserve domestically at once (MLAT is slow); no fixed statutory period. **Related:** Cloud; PMLA note. **MLAT timeline?** Long – domestic preservation must not wait. ## Emergency disclosure – imminent-harm request (threat / NCII spread) Threat to kill/publish tonight; routine ticket too slow. What it involvesEmergency LE + platform-escalation + protection simultaneously. Relevant lawBNS 351/308/78/79 per threat; IT Rules grievance + platform emergency channel; BNSS 173. Forum112/1930/SHO + platform emergency + NCRP. Procedure & stageCall + written emergency note with URLs/numbers + protection request. RemedyExpedited preservation/action + protection. High Court connectionHC protection direction where threat persists after complaints. Documents normally requiredThreat URLs/numbers, emergency tickets, FIR/NCRP. LimitationImmediate – emergency channel + 112/1930 now; no fixed statutory period. **Related:** Sextortion; stalking. **Wait for FIR copy?** No – emergency request and FIR run together. ## Gag / media-restraint prayer where investigation or victim-privacy at stake Parallel media posts prejudice probe or expose victim. What it involvesNarrow restraint + platform-takedown, not blanket press ban. Relevant lawContempt + BNS/IT privacy heads; CPC injunction where civil; Press norms. ForumTrial/civil court; HC on appeal/writ. Procedure & stageExact posts + prejudice/privacy affidavit; time-bound narrow prayer. RemedyTargeted restraint/removal. High Court connectionHC balances free speech vs fair-trial/privacy – specificity decides. Documents normally requiredPost URLs, prejudice note, FIR/case number. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – move promptly with exact URLs and prejudice/privacy affidavit. **Related:** Defamation; injunction. **Ban all reporting?** Courts prefer narrow URL-specific orders. ## Costs / compensation for illegal search or data loss by custodian Device/data damaged in custody; business loss. What it involvesCustody-complaint + compensation track per forum. Relevant lawBNSS 106 custody bond, 497/503 custody/disposal orders; IT 43A only against a negligent body corporate; civil damages. ForumMagistrate (custody complaint) → civil/consumer for loss. Procedure & stageCondition-noted seizure memo + damage report + loss ledger. RemedyReturn/repair/compensation per proof. High Court connectionHC writ/revision on custody illegality after Magistrate record. Documents normally requiredPre-seizure condition note, custody receipts, loss bills. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – custody complaint promptly; civil compensation for an act done under an enactment – 1 year from the act (Limitation Act, Art 72); residuary 3 years (Art 113). **Related:** Seizure; FSL. **Prove condition?** Photograph + hash + memo at seizure. ## Record-retention for cyber file – what to keep for 6 years Papers scattered across phone, bank, police. What it involvesSingle indexed file – complaints, acks, statements, BSA 63, orders, deposit receipts. Relevant lawLimitation Act, 1963 (civil suits/appeals); BNSS 514 (bar to cognizance) – periods differ by track. ForumAll – file supports every forum. Procedure & stageMaster index + chronological PDFs + certified orders. RemedyFaster bail/de-freeze/appeal/writ drafting. High Court connectionIndexed paper-book is what HC reads. Documents normally requiredIndex template + master PDF. LimitationNo single statutory retention period – keep the file until every limitation/appeal period in your tracks has run. **Related:** Drafting; CIBIL-next. **Keep originals?** Yes – originals + certified + hash-noted copies. ## When to brief High Court counsel – cyber-matter triage (High Court-primary) Unsure whether Magistrate, Sessions, or HC is next. What it involvesTriage – de-freeze→Magistrate; bail→Sessions then HC; quash/inaction/blocking→HC. Relevant lawBNSS 106/175(3)/438 r/w 442 (revision)/482-483/528; Art 226/227; IT 62/69A. ForumMap before filing. Procedure & stageOne-page triage note + paper-book check before HC filing. RemedyCorrect forum first time; costs/time saved. High Court connectionThis note exists to keep HC filings precise and review-ready. Documents normally requiredTriage checklist + paper-book index. LimitationNo fixed statutory period – forum-dependent; act per custody/charge/trial stage. **Related:** All above. **Direct HC for refund?** HC generally directs decision per law – build Magistrate/bank record first. More in this area ## Cyber crime & IT Act matters: other matters - [UPI, QR-code and OTP phishing](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/upi-qr-otp-phishing/) - [Investment, task, crypto, ransomware and BEC fraud](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/investment-task-crypto-ransomware-bec/) - [Bank account freeze, lien and mule-account allegations](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/freeze-lien-mule-ncrp/) - [Harassment, sextortion and defamation](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/harassment-sextortion-defamation/) - Intermediaries, evidence and search [Every matter in this area, on one page →](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/) [Cyber crime & IT Act matters: the practice area →](https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/) Procedure guides - [Bank Account Frozen by Kerala Cyber Cell](https://advaslam.com/guides/bank-account-frozen-kerala-cyber-cell-guide/) - [Digital Arrest & Online Harassment, Kerala](https://advaslam.com/guides/digital-arrest-online-harassment-response-note/) Contact [WhatsApp](https://wa.me/919497240215?text=Hello%2C%20I%20found%20advaslam.com%20and%20would%20like%20to%20discuss%20a%20matter.) [contact@advaslam.com](mailto:contact@advaslam.com) [+91 94972 40215](tel:+919497240215) 3rd Floor, Lalan Towers (KGL Builders), Vanchi Square, High Court Junction, Ernakulam, Kerala 682031 · Monday – Saturday, 10:00 – 18:30 (by appointment) ```json {"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https://advaslam.com/#website","url":"https://advaslam.com","name":"Adv. K J Muhammed Aslam","alternateName":"advaslam.com","publisher":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#person"},"inLanguage":"en-IN"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https://advaslam.com/#person","name":"K J Muhammed Aslam","alternateName":["Adv. K J Muhammed Aslam","Advocate K J Muhammed Aslam","Muhammed Aslam K J","Adv. Aslam"],"honorificPrefix":"Adv.","jobTitle":"Advocate","description":"Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Kerala, practising from High Court Junction, Ernakulam: cyber and technology law, data protection (DPDP), business, banking and IPR, and litigation before the High Court of Kerala and the courts at Ernakulam.","url":"https://advaslam.com/profile/","image":"https://advaslam.com/og.png","telephone":"+919497240215","email":"contact@advaslam.com","address":{"@type":"PostalAddress","streetAddress":"3rd Floor, Lalan Towers (KGL Builders), Vanchi Square, High Court Junction","addressLocality":"Ernakulam","addressRegion":"Kerala","postalCode":"682031","addressCountry":"IN"},"alumniOf":{"@type":"CollegeOrUniversity","name":"Bharata Mata School of Legal Studies"},"memberOf":[{"@type":"Organization","name":"Bar Council of Kerala","url":"https://barcouncilkerala.org/lawyer-registry-list"},{"@type":"Organization","name":"Kerala High Court Advocates' Association","url":"https://khcaa.com/"}],"identifier":[{"@type":"PropertyValue","propertyID":"Bar Council of Kerala Enrolment No.","value":"K/001823/2026"},{"@type":"PropertyValue","propertyID":"KHCAA Membership No.","value":"OAJ 358"}],"knowsAbout":["Information Technology Act 2000","Cyber crime law","Technology law and technology contracts","Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023","DPDP compliance","Data protection and privacy law","Business and commercial law","Contract drafting and negotiation","Banking and finance law","Negotiable Instruments Act cheque dishonour","SARFAESI Act","Intellectual property law","Copyright and trademark law","Patent infringement","GST and income-tax law","Blockchain and cryptocurrency technology","Web3 wallets and NFTs","Drone regulation and DigitalSky framework","Writ petitions under Article 226","Criminal law","Civil and consumer litigation","Family and succession law","Service and labour law","Legal drafting","Mediation and dispute resolution"],"knowsLanguage":["en","ml"],"workLocation":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#practice"},"hasCredential":[{"@type":"EducationalOccupationalCredential","credentialCategory":"Enrolment as an advocate","identifier":"K/001823/2026","recognizedBy":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Bar Council of Kerala"},"description":"Enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of Kerala (K/001823/2026), 2026"},{"@type":"EducationalOccupationalCredential","credentialCategory":"degree","educationalLevel":"Bachelor","recognizedBy":{"@type":"CollegeOrUniversity","name":"Bharata Mata School of Legal Studies"},"description":"BBA LLB (Hons.), Bharata Mata School of Legal Studies (2025)"},{"@type":"EducationalOccupationalCredential","credentialCategory":"Remote Pilot Certificate","recognizedBy":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Directorate General of Civil Aviation, India"},"description":"DGCA Remote Pilot Certificate, issued 2022"}],"subjectOf":[{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Govind Babu v. State of Kerala (Crl.M.C. No. 5640 of 2026, 2026:KER:69496)","url":"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/151180872/","datePublished":"2026-09-10","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"High Court of Kerala"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Viji Sagar v. State of Kerala (Crl.M.C. No. 1603 of 2026, 2026:KER:20803)","url":"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/193042273/","datePublished":"2026-03-09","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"High Court of Kerala"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Anjana v. Manoharan A.P. (C.R.P. No. 442 of 2025, 2026:KER:10054)","url":"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/68585852/","datePublished":"2026-02-05","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"High Court of Kerala"}}],"sameAs":["https://www.linkedin.com/in/azlubro","https://portal.khcaa.com/advocate?id=10480","https://lexosys.com"]},{"@type":"LegalService","@id":"https://advaslam.com/#practice","name":"Adv. K J Muhammed Aslam — Advocate, Ernakulam","url":"https://advaslam.com","image":"https://advaslam.com/og.png","telephone":"+919497240215","email":"contact@advaslam.com","address":{"@type":"PostalAddress","streetAddress":"3rd Floor, Lalan Towers (KGL Builders), Vanchi Square, High Court Junction","addressLocality":"Ernakulam","addressRegion":"Kerala","postalCode":"682031","addressCountry":"IN"},"geo":{"@type":"GeoCoordinates","latitude":9.9889,"longitude":76.2748},"hasMap":"https://www.google.com/maps/search/?api=1&query=Lalan+Towers+High+Court+Junction+Ernakulam","areaServed":[{"@type":"City","name":"Ernakulam"},{"@type":"City","name":"Kochi"},{"@type":"State","name":"Kerala"},{"@type":"Country","name":"India"}],"openingHoursSpecification":{"@type":"OpeningHoursSpecification","dayOfWeek":["Monday","Tuesday","Wednesday","Thursday","Friday","Saturday"],"opens":"10:00","closes":"18:30"},"founder":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#person"},"knowsAbout":["Cyber crime and IT Act matters","Data protection and DPDP Act compliance","Business, banking, intellectual property and tax","Legal drafting","Criminal law: bail, quash and appeals","Writ petitions before the High Court of Kerala","Civil, property and consumer matters","Family and succession matters","Service and labour matters"]},{"@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Intermediaries, evidence and search","description":"Intermediaries, evidence and search: 24 matters, each with the law, forum, procedure, documents and limitation. Domain / website blocking – Sec 69A IT Act…","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/","inLanguage":"en-IN","dateModified":"2026-09-28T00:00:00.000Z","isPartOf":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#website"},"author":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#person"},"mainEntity":{"@type":"ItemList","numberOfItems":24,"itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Domain / website blocking – Sec 69A IT Act route (procedure information)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#domain-website-blocking-sec-69a-it-act-route-procedure-information"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"INDRP / UDRP – look-alike domain (bankname-support.in) used for fraud","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#indrp-udrp-look-alike-domain-bankname-supportin-used-for-fraud"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Social-media account ban / shadow-ban challenge – creator/business page disabled","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#social-media-account-ban-shadow-ban-challenge-creatorbusiness-page-disabled"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"BSA 63 certificate drafting – dual certificates (custodian + system/process)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#bsa-63-certificate-drafting-dual-certificates-custodian-systemprocess"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":5,"name":"Police seizure without memo/hash – phone/laptop taken, no paper given","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#police-seizure-without-memohash-phonelaptop-taken-no-paper-given"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":6,"name":"Article 20(3) – password / biometric / decryption demand during search","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#article-203-password-biometric-decryption-demand-during-search"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":7,"name":"FSL – phone / hard-disk / CCTV forensic examination request (Kerala)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#fsl-phone-hard-disk-cctv-forensic-examination-request-kerala"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":8,"name":"Cloud data / Gmail / Drive / WhatsApp-backup disclosure – MLAT vs platform channel","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#cloud-data-gmail-drive-whatsapp-backup-disclosure-mlat-vs-platform-channel"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":9,"name":"FSL-direction writ – device/FSL/report pending, trial or lien stuck","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#fsl-direction-writ-devicefslreport-pending-trial-or-lien-stuck"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":10,"name":"Platform grievance → GAC → court escalation bundle (Rule 3 / 3A)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#platform-grievance-gac-court-escalation-bundle-rule-3-3a"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":11,"name":"Intermediary safe-harbour note – IT 79 due-diligence relevance","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#intermediary-safe-harbour-note-it-79-due-diligence-relevance"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":12,"name":"Search of office/home in cyber case – BNSS 185 + 105 compliance checklist","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#search-of-officehome-in-cyber-case-bnss-185-105-compliance-checklist"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":13,"name":"CDR / IPDR / TSP disclosure request – who can ask, how long retained","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#cdr-ipdr-tsp-disclosure-request-who-can-ask-how-long-retained"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":14,"name":"Bank-statement / UPI-switch proof – BSA 63 pair for money trail","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#bank-statement-upi-switch-proof-bsa-63-pair-for-money-trail"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":15,"name":"CCTV / ATM footage preservation – overwrite-risk letter drafting","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#cctv-atm-footage-preservation-overwrite-risk-letter-drafting"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":16,"name":"App-permission / APK forensics – smishing-APK examination questions","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#app-permission-apk-forensics-smishing-apk-examination-questions"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":17,"name":"Voice / call-recording proof – vishing audio + transcript + BSA 63","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#voice-call-recording-proof-vishing-audio-transcript-bsa-63"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":18,"name":"Hash / chain-of-custody note – one-page format for every device","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#hash-chain-of-custody-note-one-page-format-for-every-device"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":19,"name":"Cross-border fraud – server/admin outside India, victim in Kerala","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#cross-border-fraud-serveradmin-outside-india-victim-in-kerala"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":20,"name":"Emergency disclosure – imminent-harm request (threat / NCII spread)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#emergency-disclosure-imminent-harm-request-threat-ncii-spread"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":21,"name":"Gag / media-restraint prayer where investigation or victim-privacy at stake","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#gag-media-restraint-prayer-where-investigation-or-victim-privacy-at-stake"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":22,"name":"Costs / compensation for illegal search or data loss by custodian","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#costs-compensation-for-illegal-search-or-data-loss-by-custodian"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":23,"name":"Record-retention for cyber file – what to keep for 6 years","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#record-retention-for-cyber-file-what-to-keep-for-6-years"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":24,"name":"When to brief High Court counsel – cyber-matter triage (High Court-primary)","url":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#when-to-brief-high-court-counsel-cyber-matter-triage-hc-primary"}]}},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https://advaslam.com/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Practice","item":"https://advaslam.com/practice/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Cyber crime & IT Act matters","item":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Matters","item":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":5,"name":"Intermediaries, evidence and search","item":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/"}]},{"@type":"FAQPage","@id":"https://advaslam.com/practice/cyber-crime/matters/intermediary-evidence-search/#faq","isPartOf":{"@id":"https://advaslam.com/#website"},"mainEntity":[{"@type":"Question","name":"HC orders block directly?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Generally through statutory process – HC directs consideration."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Faster – crime or domain case?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Both – crime freezes money, domain case removes lure."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"HC restores page?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Rare directly – record of Rule 4(8)/GAC exhaustion decides."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"One bank seal enough?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No – BSA 63(4) certificate is signed by the person in charge and an expert (Schedule Parts A and B)."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Refuse to give phone?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Do not obstruct – ask for memo/hash/receipt and note objections in writing."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Must share password on spot?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Ask for written order and take advice – do not destroy or alter."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Private lab report enough?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"IO/FSL chain is stronger for trial."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Victim requests Google directly?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Victim gets own data; suspect/third-party needs IO channel."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"HC orders FSL result?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Direction to act time-bound, not dictated opinion."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Skip GAC to court?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Courts ask why statutory appeal was bypassed."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Notice in comments enough?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No – grievance-page + written notice with URLs."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Stop search?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Do not obstruct – record objections in writing."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Victim gets CDR?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Own billing details yes; others' records via IO/court."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Passbook copy enough?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Certified + BSA 63 is stronger."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Photo of screen enough?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Original file + certificate is stronger."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Reset phone?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Only after IO imaging."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Recorded without telling – admissible?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Legality vs admissibility is court-tested – preserve original either way."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Hash needed for phone?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes – re-opening without re-hash invites dispute."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"MLAT timeline?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Long – domestic preservation must not wait."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Wait for FIR copy?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No – emergency request and FIR run together."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Ban all reporting?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Courts prefer narrow URL-specific orders."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Prove condition?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Photograph + hash + memo at seizure."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Keep originals?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes – originals + certified + hash-noted copies."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Direct HC for refund?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"HC generally directs decision per law – build Magistrate/bank record first."}}]}]} ```