The United Nations Cybercrime Convention's introduction of passive personality jurisdiction and its consequences for India's cybercrime framework are critically examined in this essay. It examines how the Convention adds to worries about jurisdictional creep in cyberspace by allowing nations to exercise jurisdiction based on the nationality of cybercrime victims. The paper compares India's current legal system under the ‘Information Technology Act of 2000’ and the ‘Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita of 2023’ with the jurisdictional requirements of the Convention using a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology. In order to improve India's readiness for changing transnational cybercrime threats while preserving constitutional rights, due process, and national sovereignty, the paper analyses important institutional and legal deficiencies and suggests improvements.