Truecaller harassment: complaint, removal and the law

By Advocate Panchanand Shaw, Bar Council of West Bengal · Published 2 Nov 2026 · Cyber crime

If your phone number carries an obscene name, a false spam tag or abusive comments on Truecaller, the person who wrote it is the offender and Truecaller is the intermediary. Start with a written removal request to its grievance officer, preserve dated evidence, and escalate to the cyber cell if it is not removed within fifteen days.

Truecaller is unusual among harassment complaints because the harm is usually published by a stranger and displayed to everybody who receives your call. A number tagged with an obscene name, a false 'fraud' label or a string of abusive comments follows the subscriber into every conversation, and for a doctor, a driver, a teacher or anyone whose number is publicly listed, the damage is immediate and commercial as well as personal.

The legal position is more favourable than most victims expect, but it is built on a narrow foundation. Truecaller is a directory built from crowdsourced data, so the identification of a number as belonging to a particular person or business is user-generated content. That means the primary liability sits with whoever wrote it, while the platform's obligation is to act on a proper notice. Getting a remedy therefore means doing two things at once: compelling the platform to remove, and preserving enough evidence to pursue the person who posted.

What Truecaller is, and why that shapes the remedy

Truecaller is a caller identification service that maintains a searchable database of phone numbers, names and community tags. Users can suggest a name for an unknown number, mark it as spam, and add comments. Those suggestions are aggregated, and a number can end up carrying a label that its owner never chose and cannot edit directly.

Because the content is user-generated, the platform claims protection as an intermediary. Under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, an intermediary is exempt from liability for third-party information it hosts, provided it has observed due diligence and complied with the rules. That exemption is conditional, and it is withdrawn where the intermediary fails to act after receiving actual knowledge or a court or government order — the mechanism in Section 79(3)(b).

The due diligence conditions live in the Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules, 2021. Rule 3(1)(b) requires an intermediary to make reasonable efforts to ensure that users do not host content that is defamatory, obscene, paedophilic, invasive of privacy or impersonating another person. Rule 3(2) requires a grievance officer resident in India, acknowledgement of a complaint within twenty-four hours, and disposal within fifteen days. Those two rules are the lever a victim actually pulls.

What the tag or comment is, in law

The section follows the words, not the app. A false name or comment that lowers a person's reputation in the estimation of others is defamation under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, punishable with simple imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both. The same conduct supports a civil suit for damages and an injunction, which is often the more useful remedy because it can be obtained against an unknown defendant described by their handle.

Where the label is sexually explicit or obscene, Section 67 of the IT Act applies to publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form, with up to three years and a fine up to five lakh rupees on first conviction. Where it is sexually explicit in the narrower sense, Section 67A applies.

Where the taggings are accompanied by calls, messages or repeated attempts to contact, the conduct moves into the BNS: Section 351 for criminal intimidation, Section 78 for stalking where the recipient is a woman and the contact persists despite disinterest, and Section 79 where words or images are intended to insult her modesty.

Where the person creating the tags is posing as you, or has taken over an account linked to your number, Section 66C of the IT Act (identity theft) and Section 66D (cheating by personation using a computer resource) come into play. Where your number was obtained or published along with other personal data as part of a campaign, the privacy provision in Section 66E and, at the regulatory level, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 are relevant — though the DPDP Act's substantive obligations are being brought into force in stages, so it is not yet a reliable standalone remedy for an individual complainant.

The removal process, step by step

Do not respond to the tagger. Anything you write can be quoted back, and it confirms the number is live.
Document before you complain. Record your screen while searching your own number, so the tag, the comments and the date appear in one continuous capture. Capture the app version and the login state. Note the display names of anyone who commented.
Claim your listing. Truecaller allows a subscriber to verify and claim their own number, which gives you control over the name shown and is faster than any legal process for correcting a wrong name. This does not remove other people's comments.
Use the in-app report on each item. Report the specific tag and each comment separately. Keep the acknowledgement emails.
Write to the grievance officer. Address it to the grievance officer of the Indian entity, identify each offending item, state why it is defamatory or obscene, and demand removal within the fifteen days the 2021 Rules allow. Send it from an email address you control and keep the delivery record.
Escalate to the cyber crime cell. File on cybercrime.gov.in under 'Report Other Cyber Crime' and give the local cyber cell a written complaint. Attach the grievance officer correspondence, which shows the platform was put on notice.
Apply to the magistrate if nothing moves. A private complaint for defamation lies before the jurisdictional magistrate, and Section 175(3) of the BNSS, 2023 allows a complainant to seek a direction to investigate where the police decline to register an FIR.

What you are complaining about, and where

What appears	Legal characterisation	First step
A false name or business label	Defamation, Section 356 BNS; Rule 3(1)(b) violation	Claim the listing, then grievance officer
Obscene or sexual tag or comment	Section 67 or 67A IT Act	Grievance officer plus cyber cell, same day
'Spam' or 'fraud' tag that is false	Defamation, and trade disparagement if it is a business number	Grievance officer; civil injunction if revenue loss
Impersonation using your number	Sections 66C and 66D IT Act	Police complaint, with the profile details
Tags plus calls and messages	Sections 351, 78 or 79 BNS	Cyber cell; FIR
Publication of your number with other data	Section 66E IT Act; DPDP Act 2023	Police complaint; platform notice

One practical point about the 'spam' tag deserves separate mention. A number that is repeatedly marked as spam by users who simply did not answer a call can acquire a label through no fault of the owner. For a business, that is a commercial injury with a reputational cause, and the remedy is the same defamation route — but the evidence has to include the business impact, such as a drop in answered calls, which is difficult to prove and should be documented as it happens rather than reconstructed later.

Proving it, under Section 63 of the BSA

Electronic records are proved under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which requires production of the device or medium along with a certificate identifying the record, describing the device and addressing the integrity of the manner of production. The old Section 65B practice survives in substance: a screenshot is not evidence until somebody certifies how it was made.

For a Truecaller complaint this means preserving the handset, keeping the app installed and signed in, and making your captures in a way that shows the search was for your own number rather than a constructed image. A continuous screen recording from opening the app to displaying the tag is far stronger than a still. If the tag has already been removed by the time you reach court, the recording and the platform's own removal correspondence become the case.

Identity of the tagger is the harder problem. Truecaller holds account data; the police can seek it in a registered case. Without an FIR, a victim is dependent on the platform's voluntary cooperation, which is limited. That asymmetry — not any doctrinal difficulty — is why these complaints stall.

What decides the outcome

Whether the platform was properly notified. The safe harbour in Section 79 is lost on failure to act after actual knowledge. A dated, itemised notice to the grievance officer is what converts a host into a defendant.

Whether the content is clearly false or clearly obscene. A wrong name is corrected quickly. A comment that is opinion, or borderline, is defended as such and removal becomes discretionary.

Whether there is a pattern. One tag looks like a database error. Twenty tags from accounts created the same week looks like a campaign, and campaign evidence supports stalking and intimidation charges.

Whether the complainant is a public figure or a business. Courts weigh reputation claims differently for public figures, and a business must show actual loss rather than hurt feelings.

Whether removal or damages is the real goal. Removal is fast and cheap. Damages require identifying a defendant, proving publication to third parties and quantifying loss, and most complainants discover at that stage that they wanted the tag gone, not a judgment.

What not to do

Tag the other person back. It converts you from complainant to participant and is itself actionable.
Post about it publicly with the person's name. If you identify them and you are wrong, you have committed the same wrong you are complaining about.
Change your number as a first step. It is the most effective practical remedy for persistent abuse, but it disrupts clients and contacts and lets the tagger win by default. Treat it as a last resort, after preservation.
Assume a foreign platform is beyond reach. A platform offering services to Indian users and claiming safe harbour is expected to appoint a grievance officer and comply with the 2021 Rules; MeitY also has blocking powers under Section 69A of the IT Act.
Rely on the app's report button alone. It produces no statutory record and no obligation to reply.

Where the tags are accompanied by extortion — a demand to pay to have them removed — the case changes character entirely and becomes criminal intimidation and extortion, which the police pursue far more readily than a defamation complaint. If that is what you are facing, the material on criminal complaint and defence work explains how such a demand should be documented, and a West Bengal cyber crime lawyer can advise on the correct forum in Kolkata.

When to involve a lawyer

For a single wrong name or a stray obscene comment, the platform's own process usually resolves it within a fortnight and a lawyer adds cost without adding speed. Instruct one when the grievance officer does not respond inside fifteen days, when the tags are part of a campaign against you or your business, when the content accuses you of a crime, or when a police complaint has been converted into a dispute about your own conduct. Defamation also has a limitation clock, and a claim that is left for two years is a claim that has usually expired.

Need help with a cyber crime matter?

Tell me what happened and I will tell you what to file, where, and by when. First conversation is free.

Call +91-9007000603 WhatsApp

Frequently asked questions

Can I get my name removed from Truecaller if it is wrong or abusive?

Yes. Claim and verify your own listing to correct the displayed name, then report each offending tag or comment in the app and write to the grievance officer. Under the Intermediary Guidelines Rules, 2021 the officer must acknowledge within twenty-four hours and dispose of the complaint within fifteen days.

Is tagging someone as spam on Truecaller a criminal offence?

It can be. A false label that lowers a person's reputation is defamation under Section 356 of the BNS, 2023, and if the label is obscene it also falls under Section 67 of the IT Act. A single mistaken tag is usually corrected quietly; a coordinated campaign supports stalking and intimidation charges.

How do I prove who tagged my number on Truecaller?

You usually cannot, on your own. Truecaller holds the account data and will generally release it only to police in a registered case. That is why an FIR matters: it gives the investigating officer power to seek the account details from the platform, while a civil suit can seek the same information through the court.

What evidence should I preserve before complaining to Truecaller?

Make a continuous screen recording from opening the app to displaying the tag, so the date and the search for your own number appear in one capture. Keep the handset without resetting it, save the report acknowledgements, and keep every email to and from the grievance officer, because Section 63 of the BSA requires authenticated electronic records.

How long does Truecaller have to respond to a grievance?

Under Rule 3(2) of the Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules, 2021, an intermediary must acknowledge a complaint within twenty-four hours and dispose of it within fifteen days. If that does not happen, the safe harbour under Section 79 of the IT Act is open to challenge and escalation to the cyber cell is justified.

Can I sue Truecaller for defamatory content posted by users?

A suit is possible, but the stronger claim is against the person who posted the content. Truecaller's protection as an intermediary under Section 79 of the IT Act is lost only if it fails to act after receiving actual knowledge or a court or government order, so the notice you send is the critical document.

Is a foreign company like Truecaller bound by Indian law?

A platform offering services to users in India and claiming intermediary protection is expected to comply with the 2021 Rules, including appointing a grievance officer resident in India. The government also has blocking powers under Section 69A of the IT Act, though those are exercised at a policy level rather than for individual complaints.

Should I change my phone number to escape harassment?

Only as a last resort. Changing the number stops the harassment but disrupts clients, contacts and linked accounts, and it destroys the continuity of your evidence. Preserve the record and pursue removal first; change the number if the campaign continues after a police complaint.

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.

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