INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

ACT,2000

By;
S. Karpaga Priya
Advocate
HIGH COURT
CHENNAI
• Information Technology Act,2000 is the primary law in India dealing with Cyber

Crimes & Electronic Commerce.

• Information Technology Act is based on the United Nations Model law on Electronic

Commerce 1996 (UNCITRAL Model) which was suggested by the General Assembly

of United Nations by a resolution dated on 30th January, 1997.

• Bill was passed in the budget session of 2000 and signed by president K.R.

Narayanan on 9th May 2000.

• The act was commenced on 17th October 2000.

• The latest amendment of the IT Act was made on 2008.

 OBJECTIVES
• The Information Technology Act, 2000 provides legal recognition to the
transaction done via electronic exchange of data and other electronic
means of communication or electronic commerce transactions.

• This act involves the use of alternatives to a paper-based method of

communication and information storage to facilitate the electronic filing of
documents with the Government agencies.

• This act amended the Indian Penal Code 1860, the Indian Evidence Act
1872, the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act 1891, and the Reserve Bank of
India Act 1934.
 CHAPTERS

• The Information Technology Act (IT Act) contains 13 chapters and 90 sections and 2
schedules.

• Chapter 1, which deals with the short, title, extent, commencement and application of the
Act in Section 1. Section 2 provides Definition.

• Chapter 2 deals with the authentication of electronic records, digital signatures, electronic
signatures, etc.

• Chapter 3 deals with Electronic Governance such as electronic signature, its validity and
powers.
• Chapter 4 deals with Attribution , acknowledgement and despatch of

electronic records.

• Chapter 5 deals with securing electronic records and electronic signature

and security of its procedures and practices.

• Chapter 6 deals with regulation of certifying authorities where application,

renewal, grant or rejection, suspension or revocation, license will be given.

• Chapter 7 deals with Electronic Signature Certificates which talks about

issuing of certificate by certifying authority and suspension or revocation
of the certificate will be explained.

• Chapter 8 deals with duties of subscribers of electronic signature

certificate.
• Chapter 9 deals with Penalty, compensation and adjudication for any
damage done to computer, computer system or data.

• Chapter 10 deals with appellate tribunal.

• Chapter 11 deals with offences and penalties. A series of offences have

been provided along with punishment in this part of The Act.

• Chapter 12 and 12A deals with intermediaries not be liable in certain cases
and examiner of electronic evidence.

• Chapter 13 deals with miscellaneous sections.

•
 IMPORTANT PROVISIONS UNDER THE IT ACT,2000

• SECTION 43- This section of IT Act, 2000 states that any act of destroying, altering or stealing
computer system/network or deleting data with malicious intentions without authorization from
owner of the computer is liable for the payment to be made to owner as compensation for
damages.

• SECTION 43A - This section of IT Act, 2000 states that any corporate body dealing with
sensitive information that fails to implement reasonable security practices causing loss of other
person will also liable as convict for compensation to the affected party.
• SECTION 65- This section of IT act states that, If a person knowingly or intentionally
conceals, destroys or alters or intentionally or knowingly causes another to conceal,
destroy or alter any computer source code used for a computer, computer programme,
computer system or computer network, when the computer source code is required to be
kept or maintained by law for the time being in force.

PENALTY - Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹200,000

• SECTION 66- This section of IT act states that, If a person with the intent to cause or
knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage to the public or any person
destroys or deletes or alters any information residing in a computer resource or diminishes
its value or utility or affects it injuriously by any means, commits hack.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹500,000

• SECTION 66A- This section of IT act states that, Any person who sends by any means of
a computer resource any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character;
or any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance,
inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult shall be punishable with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to three years and with fine.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, with fine.

• SECTION 66B- This section states that, A person receives or retains a computer resource
or communication device which is known to be stolen or the person has reason to believe
is stolen.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹100,000

• SECTION 66C- This section states that, A person fraudulently uses the password, digital
signature or other unique identification of another person.
 PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹100,000

• SECTION 66D- This section states that, If a person cheats someone using a computer
resource or communication.

PENALTY - Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹100,000

• SECTION 66E- If a person captures, transmits or publishes images of a person’s private

parts without his/her consent or knowledge.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹200,000

• SECTION 66F- If a person denies access to an authorised personnel to a computer

resource, accesses a protected system or introduces contaminant into a system, with the
intention of threatening the unity, integrity, sovereignty or security of India, then he
commits cyberterrorism.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to life.

• SECTION 67- This section states that, If a person publishes or transmits or causes to be
published in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the
prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are
likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter
contained or embodied in it.
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to five years, or/and with fine up to ₹1,000,000
• SECTION 67A- This section states that, If a person publishes or transmits images
containing a sexual explicit act or conduct.
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to seven years, or/and with fine up to ₹1,000,000
• SECTION 67B- This section states that,If a person captures, publishes or transmits
images of a child in a sexually explicit act or conduct. If a person induces a child into a
sexual act. A child thus defined as anyone under 18.
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to five years, or/and with fine up to ₹1,000,000 on first
conviction. Imprisonment up to seven years, or/and with fine up to ₹1,000,000 on second
conviction.
• SECTION 67C- This section states that, Persons deemed as
intermediatory (such as an ISP) must maintain required records for
stipulated time. Failure is an offence.
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine.
• SECTION 68- This section states that, The Controller may, by order,
direct a Certifying Authority or any employee of such Authority to take
such measures or cease carrying on such activities as specified in the order
if those are necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Act,
rules or any regulations made thereunder. Any person who fails to comply
with any such order shall be guilty of an offence
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up
to ₹200,000
• SECTION 69- This section states that, If the Controller is satisfied that it
is necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of the sovereignty or
integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign
Stales or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of
any cognizable offence, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order,
direct any agency of the Government to intercept any information
transmitted through any computer resource. The subscriber or any person
in charge of the computer resource shall, when called upon by any agency
which has been directed, must extend all facilities and technical assistance
to decrypt the information. The subscriber or any person who fails to assist
the agency referred is deemed to have committed a crime.
PENALTY- Imprisonment up to seven years and possible fine.
• SECTION 70- This section states that, The appropriate Government may, by notification
in the Official Gazette, declare that any computer, computer system or computer network
to be a protected system.

The appropriate Government may, by order in writing, authorize the persons who are
authorized to access protected systems. If a person who secures access or attempts to secure
access to a protected system, then he is committing an offence.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to ten years, or/and with fine.

• SECTION 71 – This section states that, If anyone makes any misrepresentation to, or
suppresses any material fact from, the Controller or the Certifying Authority for obtaining
any license or Digital Signature Certificate.

PENALTY- Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to ₹100,000

• SECTION 72- This section states that, if any person who, in pursuance of any of the
powers conferred under this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder, has secured access
to any electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document or other
material without the consent of the person concerned discloses such electronic record,
book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material to any other
person

PENALTY- imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which
may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.

• SECTION 72A- This section states that, any person including an intermediary who, while
providing services under the terms of lawful contract, has secured access to any material
containing personal information about another person, with the intent to cause or knowing
that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or wrongful gain discloses, without the consent of
the person concerned, or in breach of a lawful contract, such material to any other person
 PENALTY- imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine
which may extend to five lakh rupees, or with both.

• SECTION 73- No person shall publish a [electronic signature] Certificate or otherwise

make it available to any other person with the knowledge that, the Certifying Authority
listed in the certificate has not issued it, or the subscriber listed in the certificate has not
accepted it, or the certificate has been revoked or suspended, unless such publication is for
the purpose of verifying a [electronic signature] created prior to such suspension or
revocation.

PENALTY- imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which
may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.
• SECTION 74- This section states that, Whoever knowingly creates, publishes or

otherwise makes available a [electronic signature] Certificate for any fraudulent or

unlawful purpose.

• PENALTY- imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which

may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.

 CATEGORIES OF CYBER CRIME

• CYBER CRIME AGAINST PERSON:

I. Cyber stalking

II. Impersonation

III. Loss of privacy

IV. Transmission of Obscene material

V. Harassment with the use computer.

• CYBER CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY:
I. Unauthorised computer trespassing.
II. Computer vandalism.
III. Transmission of harmful programmes.
IV. Siphoning of funds from financial.
V. Stealing secret information and data.
VI. Copyright.

• CYBER CRIME AGAINST GOVERNMENT:

I. Hacking of government websites.
II. Cyber Extortion.
III. Cyber terrorism.
 CYBER CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN

• Cyber stalking.
• Cyber bullying ( social networking sites like Facebook, Instagram, twitter) the air force
bal barathi school case.
• Cyber pornography.
• Sexual defamation.
• Morphing ( Salem girl-suicide, Delhi school girl- suicide)- Revenge Porn.
• Cyber Flirting
• Hacking.
 PROVISIONS AND PUNISHMENTS DEALING WITH
CYBER CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN

• Hacking – sec 65,66 - 3years and fine 2lakhs

• Cyber stalking- sec66a- 3 years and fine

• Cyber defamation-sec66a-3years and 2laks fine

• Pornography -67a -7 years and fine up to 10 lakhs

• Punishment for violation of privacy of women- transmits/publishes of

private parts of women -Sec -66e-3years and not exceeding 2lakhs or with
both
• 509Aof Indian penal code –outraging the modesty of women-1year or fine
or both

• 354A of Indian penal code-Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual

harassment-1year or fine or both

• 354D of Indian penal code –Stalking-5years and fine

• 292 of Indian penal code-Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc.-5years and fine.
 INDIAN PENAL CODE PROVISIONS

• Sec. 292 IPC : Obscenity

• Sec. 292A IPC : Printing etc. of grossly indecent or scurrilous matter or
matter intended to blackmail
• Sec. 293 IPC : Sale, etc., of obscene objects to young person
• Sec. 294 IPC : Obscene acts and songs
• Sec. 420 IPC : Bogus websites, cyber frauds
• Sec. 463 IPC : E-mail spoofing
• Sec. 464 IPC : Making a false document
• Sec. 468 IPC : Forgery for purpose of cheating

• Sec. 469 IPC : Forgery for purpose of harming reputation

• Sec. 499 IPC : Sending defamatory messages by e-mail

• Sec. 500 IPC : E-mail abuse

• Sec. 503 IPC : Sending threatening messages by e-mail

• Sec. 506 IPC : Punishment for criminal intimidation

• Sec. 507 IPC : Criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication

• Sec. 419 IPC : Cheating by Personation.

 LANDMARK CASE LAWS

• The case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti can be considered as a

landmark case in the history of Cyber Crime Management in India. This was the
first case in India wherein the offender was convicted under S.67 of IT ACT
2000 of India.

• The case of Nascom v. Ajay Sood and Others is another landmark judgement
delivered in March 2005, in which the Delhi High Court declared ‘Phishing’ on
the internet to be an illegal act.
• Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), Section 66A of the Information
Technology Act, 2000 is struck down in its entirety being violative of
Article 19(1)(a) and not saved under Article 19(2). )Section 69A and the
Information Technology (Procedure & Safeguards for Blocking for Access
of Information by Public) Rules 2009 are constitutionally valid. Further,
Section 79 is valid subject to Section 79(3)(b) being read down and so on.

• Avnish Bajaj v.state known as Bazee.com case (2005),CEO of E-

Commerce Portal was arrested and given bail later under Section 67 of IT
Act on account of an obscene video uploaded on Bazee.com for sale. He
proved Due Diligence but in 2005, Information Technology Act did not
have any provisions related to ‘Intermediary’.
• Google India Pvt. Ltd v. Visaka Industries Limited (2009), Google
liable as Intermediary (if proved guilty) as criminal complaint instituted
before the Information technology (Amendment) Act 2008 came into force.

• Harpal Singh v. State of Punjab (2016), the prosecution has relied upon
the secondary evidence in the form of printed copy of the call details, even
assuming that the mandate of Section 65B(2) had been complied with, in
absence of a certificate under Section 65B(4), the same has to be held
inadmissible in evidence.
• Yahoo! Inc v. Akash Arora (1999), the plaintiff against the defendants
seeking for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants,
their partners, servants and agents from operating any business and/or
selling, offering for sale, advertising and in any manner dealing in any
services or goods on the Internet or otherwise under the trademark/domain
name ‘Yahooindia.Com’ or any other mark/domain name which is identical
with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s trademark ‘Yahoo!’ and also
for rendition of accounts and damages.
• DELFI AS v. ESTONIA (2015), a news portal held liable for comments
made on its website.- In India, this Case casts bearing on Sec 79 of the
Information Technology Act, 2000, which offers protection for
intermediaries in a particular facts & circumstances.- The Parallel of this
Case can be traced down to the Case, namely, "Shreya Singhal", where Sec
66A of the Act was quashed, and constitutional validity of Sec 79 and 79A
was upheld.
• S. Sekar v The Principal General Manager (Telecom) (B.S.N.L.) (2004),
It was held that the Police to investigate thoroughly into the matter and add
or delete the penal Sections under the Information Technology Act, 2000,
as well as IPC and ultimately, it is for the criminal court which would be
seized of the matter to decide on that. The Section 43(g) of the Information
Technology Act, 2000, invoked by the police and specified in the FIR is
declared void.
• Ritu Kohli Case, is the first case in India delaying with cyber
stalking, Ritu Kolhi’s case was an alarm to the Government, to make laws
regarding the aforesaid crime and regarding protection of victims under the
same. As a result Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000
(ITA 2008) “Punishment for sending offensive messages through
communication service, etc.
THANK YOU…