Charge sheet in credit card fraud cases: what it contains

By Advocate Panchanand Shaw, Bar Council of West Bengal · Published 3 Nov 2026 · Court process

The charge sheet is where a credit card fraud investigation turns into a prosecution. Until that document is filed, the case is an inquiry conducted by the police. After it is filed, the matter is before a court, the accused acquires rights to the record, and the trial process begins.

The governing provision is section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which replaced section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the new criminal codes came into force on 1 July 2024. If the fraud was investigated and the report filed before that date, the old provision applies; if the report was filed afterwards, section 193 applies. Knowing which regime governs the file is the first thing to check, because the contents list and the procedure differ slightly.

What a charge sheet is, and when it is filed

Section 193(1) requires every investigation under the chapter to be completed without unnecessary delay. That is the ordinary rule for a card fraud case. There is a shorter two-month deadline in section 193(2), but it applies only to specified offences under sections 64 to 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and to certain offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Credit card fraud is not in that list, so no fixed two-month limit applies to it, and the case moves at the pace the investigation allows.

When the investigation is complete, section 193(3) requires the officer in charge of the police station to forward a report to a magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report. The report may be sent through electronic communication. It is this report that carries the case into court.

The contents the section requires

Section 193(3)(i) is explicit. The report must state the following.

Two of those clauses deserve attention in this kind of case. Clause (i), the sequence of custody of an electronic device, is the chain-of-custody record for the phone, laptop or storage seized in the investigation. A gap in that sequence is a defect the defence will examine, because the integrity of the device and its contents is what makes the data usable. Clause (d) is where the sections charged appear. In a card fraud, the usual combination is cheating under section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, cheating by personation under section 319, forgery under section 336, and the corresponding computer offences under sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

The documents that travel with the report

Section 193(6) governs what accompanies the report. Where the case is one to which it applies, the police officer must forward all documents, or relevant extracts, on which the prosecution proposes to rely, other than documents already sent to the magistrate during investigation. He must also forward the statements recorded under section 180 of all the persons the prosecution proposes to examine as witnesses.

Section 193(7) allows the officer to withhold part of a statement where he is of the opinion that the part is not relevant or that its disclosure is not essential in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest. Where he does so, the section requires him to indicate that part and append a note requesting the magistrate to exclude it from the copies given to the accused, with his reasons. This is a narrow power and it is exercised on the record, not silently. If you are an accused person and a document you expect is missing from the set served on you, the note under section 193(7) is where the omission should be explained.

Where the electronic evidence sits in the charge sheet

A card fraud charge sheet is built on electronic records: transaction logs, merchant records, alert delivery records, message threads, and data extracted from a device. Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 governs the admissibility of electronic records, and section 63(4) requires a certificate to be submitted along with the electronic record at each time it is produced. That certificate must identify the record and describe how it was produced, give particulars of the device involved, and deal with the conditions in the section, and it must be signed by the person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activity, and by an expert.

The practical effect is that a charge sheet which lists electronic evidence without the accompanying certificate is vulnerable at the stage of trial, when the prosecution seeks to prove the record. Conversely, where the certificate and the custody sequence are both in order, the electronic record becomes hard to displace. The two provisions work together: clause (i) of section 193(3) supplies the custody trail, and section 63(4) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam supplies the admissibility certificate.

The ninety-day progress intimation

There is a provision that complainants rarely know about and that is genuinely useful. Section 193(3)(i) requires the police officer to inform the progress of the investigation, by any means including electronic communication, to the informant or the victim within a period of ninety days. The same provision requires the officer to communicate the action taken to the person who first gave the information about the offence.

For a card fraud victim waiting to hear what happened to a complaint, that clause is the answer to silence. It does not guarantee that a charge sheet will be filed within ninety days; it guarantees that you are told where the investigation stands. If the ninety days pass without any intimation, a written request referring specifically to section 193(3)(i) is the correct document to send, and keep a copy.

Further investigation after a charge sheet

A charge sheet is not always the end of the police role. Section 193(9) provides that nothing in the section precludes further investigation after a report has been forwarded, and where further evidence is obtained, the officer must forward a further report to the magistrate. During the trial, further investigation requires the permission of the court trying the case, and must be completed within ninety days, extendable with the court's permission.

That matters in card fraud cases for a simple reason. The person who used the card is often identified late, through beneficiary account details and call records that arrive after the first report is filed. A supplementary report naming him is the normal route, and it is not a sign that the first charge sheet was defective.

When no charge sheet is filed

If the investigation ends without sufficient material, the officer forwards a report to the effect that no offence is made out. That is still a report to the magistrate, and the complainant is entitled to notice, and may be heard before the magistrate decides whether to accept the closure or direct further investigation. The practical point for a victim is that a closure is a decision that can be contested, and a protest petition against a closure report is a recognised step.

Where the police decline to investigate a complaint altogether, the route is different, and section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 now governs a magistrate's power to order an investigation. That is the provision to cite when a complaint has been refused registration or investigation.

What the accused receives, and what follows

Section 193(8) requires the investigating officer to submit copies of the police report and the indexed documents to the magistrate, for supply to the accused. It provides that supply by electronic communication is treated as duly served. On the filing of the report and the taking of cognizance, the magistrate proceeds with the case, and the documents reach the accused.

For an accused person, three things follow immediately. The first is the right to apply for bail, and in a card fraud case the applicable bail provisions depend on the sections charged. The second is the option of challenging the proceedings itself, whether on the ground that the allegations do not make out the offence or that the case is an abuse of process; the inherent power to do so is in section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which preserves the High Court's powers in terms identical to the old section 482 of the Code. The third is the remand and default bail arithmetic, which runs under section 187 where an accused has been in custody during investigation, with the sixty and ninety day periods fixed according to the punishment for the offence.

Mistakes in reading a charge sheet

• Assuming that the charge sheet freezes the allegations. A supplementary report under section 193(9) can add accused and evidence.
• Treating every document as proved. A charge sheet is the prosecution's case on paper; admissibility is decided later.
• Overlooking the missing section 63(4) certificate until the trial has started.
• Ignoring the custody sequence for the seized device, which is where the weakest point of an electronic case is often found.
• Assuming that a closure report ends the matter. It can be contested.
• Waiting for the ninety-day intimation and then letting it pass without a written request.

When to involve a lawyer

The stage at which a charge sheet appears is the stage at which legal advice starts to pay for itself, in both directions. A complainant who has received a closure report has to decide, quickly, whether to press for further investigation. An accused person who has just been served with a report has to decide about bail, about the sections charged and about whether the proceedings can be challenged. On the complainant's side, the relevant material is on our cyber crime practice page. On the accused's side, two matters arise and they are distinct: bail, which is about liberty during the trial, and criminal defence, which is about the case itself. Either way, read the charge sheet clause by clause against section 193 before you respond to it, and if you want that done for you, contact us.

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

• Charge sheet in UPI fraud cases: what it contains
• 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
• Jurisdiction in credit card fraud cases: where to file
• Evidence checklist for credit card fraud cases

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