The Allahabad High Court has directed the Lucknow Police Cyber Cell to immediately restore a mobile number belonging to a woman that was blocked following a complaint lodged by her husband amid an ongoing matrimonial dispute.

A Division Bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena observed that the number appeared to have been blocked on the basis of a frivolous complaint and criticised the manner in which the authorities handled the matter.

“A citizen cannot be wronged in this manner by a callous handling by the State Agencies,” the Court remarked.

The woman had approached the High Court through a writ petition seeking restoration of her mobile number. Earlier in March, the Court had directed the officer in charge of the Cyber Cell at the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, to explain the circumstances under which the number was blocked.

However, on May 15, the Bench expressed dissatisfaction with the response submitted by the police authorities.

The Court noted that the dispute appeared to stem from matrimonial differences between the woman and her husband. It also criticised the explanation offered by the Cyber Cell officer, who relied on certain Ministry of Home Affairs guidelines relating to the blocking, debiting and freezing of data received through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal.

The Bench observed that such provisions were not intended to be misused in private disputes.

“There is apparently a matrimonial dispute between the parties, and whatever complaint was made is attributable to the husband. The stand taken by the Cyber Cell in-charge is highly irresponsible,” the Court said.

The Court subsequently issued notice to the State government and directed the Cyber Cell to coordinate with the telecom service provider, reportedly Jio, to restore the woman’s mobile number without delay.

It ordered the officer in charge of the Cyber Cell to personally ensure compliance and file an affidavit detailing the steps taken within one week.

The Bench also directed the husband to explain why he should not be required to compensate his wife for allegedly filing a false and frivolous complaint that resulted in the blocking of her number.

Advocate Prashant Pandey appeared on behalf of the petitioner-wife.