INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000

To provide legal recognition for transactions carried out by means of

electronic communication, commonly referred to as “electronic
Commerce” which involves the use of altematives of paper based
‘methods of communication and storage of information.
(i) To facilitate electronic filing of documents with the government
agencies.
To amend the IPC 1860, LE.A. 1872, Banker's Books Evidence Act
1891 and RBI Act 1934.
The matter connected herewith or incidental thereto.
To give effect to resolution No.A/RES/S1/162 Dated 30.1.1997
adopted by the General Assembly of the UNO on the Model Law on
Electronic Commerce adopted by UNO Commission on International
Trade Law and to promote efficient delivery of government services by
means of reliable electronic records.
Constitutional Validity of Act:
Entries 12 and 13 of Union List of 7* Schedule gives legislative power to
Parliament with regard to following subjects:
@) Entry 12-UN.O
(i) Entry 13 - Participation in International Conferences, associations and
bodies and implementation of decisions made there at. There is no
doubt about the legislative competency of the Parliament.
SPECIAL COURTS: -
1) Court of Controller
2) Adjudicating Officer
3) Cyber Appellate Tribunal
No_violation of Article 14 ofthe Constitution. It does not also violate 19(@) of
the cedom f Profeasion,ion , OCLupakeomAct,hvode o luu.kug)
nflict between Existing Law and Present
The field of CONTRACT LAW AND LAW RELATING TO SALE OF
of IT Act
GOODS ACT are existing 1T. Act section 81 provides that the provisioncontained
2000 shall have cffect not withstanding anything inconsistent therewith in
any other law for the time being in force, where there is inconsistency between
existing law and this Act, this ACT SHALL PREVAIL.
Statement of Obiects and Reasons or Preamble.
In Aswini Kumar Ghose Vrs. Arabinda Bose
AIR 1952 SC 369
“The Supreme Court considered the statement of objects and reasons appended to the
Bill should be ruled out as an aid to the construction ofa statute”.
Chief Justice Patanjali Sastri in Para 32-
“As regards the propriety of the reference of statement of objects and Reasons,
gy

it must be remembered that it secks only to explain what reasons induced the mover to
introduce the Bill in the House and what object he sought to achieve. But those
objects and reasons may or may not correspond to the objective which Majority of
members had in view when they passed it into law. The, Bill may have undergone
radical changes during its passage through the house or houses, and there is no
guarantee that reasons which led 10 its introduction and objects thereby sought to be
achieved have remained the same throughout till the Bill emerges from the House as
an Act of the Literature, for they do not form part of the bill and are not voted upon by
the Members. We, therefore, consider the statement of objects and Reasons appended

Scanned with CamScanner

o the Bill shy 2 “CONSTRUCTION OF THE '\
the
STATUTECuld be ruled outas an aid to
In Shashikant Laxman Kale Vrs. Union of India -
AIR 1990 SC 2114 .
Shemesiololi Jooked into for app'lem:l_mg
ORI oy of objects and Reasons can be usually the purpose or object
ture’s classif ication s. For determ ining
ey ground of legisla s which prevailed at that
of legislation, it is permissible to look into the circumstance of v
the law was passed and which necessitated the passing
time whenKUNJ UMUSALIAR Vrs. M. VENKITACHAL 1
(1955) 2 SCR 1196
used for. judging the reasonableness
The statement of objects and Reasons was i infringed or vias contray 1o the
of a classification made in an enactment to scethe ifquestion, even affidavit on behalf of
ining
Constitution. In that decision for determprevail ed at the time when the law there o
the State of the Circumstances which the passing the Law™.
consideration had been passed and which necessitated
Amendments of Act: Act,2000, 0 ut of 94 Sections
in the
Elaborate Amendments made in 2008 in IT 30 new sec tions (3A,6A,7A,10A
Act, about 76 sections have been amended. About
omitted: Certain chapters and new
etc.) were inserted. Many Sections substituted or
schedules have been added. gations of Rules and regulations under the act and
Thore are 23 promul
amendment there of.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
1. Sec.3 - Digital Signature
Sec.3A- Electronic signature
Private and Public keys. ronic gazette.
2. Electronic Govemance, Secti11onto 4 13.to 8 and clect
Contr acts: 10A,
3. Electronic India- Section 16.
4, Security measures prescribed by Govemnment of appointed by GOL
7() to be
i . Controller of Certifying Authority U/s.1
firt, Govt. for grant oflicense to issue
6. License to be granted to company,
Electronic Signature certificate.
7. Controller can revoke license under certain condition.
8. Controller may delegate power of investigation.
9. Centifying Authority to have reliability and correct operation.also revoke it.
10, Certfying authority can suspend electronic signature and
11, Chapter IX deals with Civil Wing and fixes the Civil liability.
12, Chapter XI deals with offences.
13. Government of India appoints Adjudicating Officer.
14. Inspector of Police and above can investigate. Any officer empowered by
S:)r{ .:‘r State along with Inspector can investigate, search, seize, arrest wilhou);
i.Iemeditory camot e held eponsil U 75
- Examiner of Electronic evidence appointed by GOI-
17. Cyber Regulatory and Advisory Body — Secl.gs T8
18. Cyber Appellate Tribunal in Chapter-X. .
CHAPTER-1
ion | 1 : Extent, Extra-tghritorial peration
Section operation ofof this A Commence of this Act, Non.
application
plicati .7of act t as : Yofuments,
= s, trar transactions giwep/ in Sche;ule 1 Th: powe: n-f
making rules ; to Govt i with Parliament
5 approval.
rrxi . Tl he Ast isi not retrospect,
e g

Scanned with CamScanner

 30
{ Recognition of Foreign certificates
and Electronic Signatures.
what xtent, a certificate or an

enacting state]
shall have the sam i an electronic
signature created j a substantial
equivalent level of,

factors.

CHAPTER |

(1) Itis called IT Act 2000

(2) “Whole of India” and any offence or contravention committed outside
India by any person.
(3) It came into force on 17.10.2000
Amend- (4) (1) Nothing in this Act shall apply to transactions specified in Schedule
ment 2009 I
THE FIRST SCHEDULE
(a) A negotiable Instrument (other than a cheque) as defined in Section
13 of the Negotiable Instrument Act 1881.
(b) A power of attorney as defined in Section 1A of Powers of Attorney
E-AUCTION Act 1882.
fanls (c) A trust as defined in Section 3 of Indian Trust Act 1882
T.N. Organic (d) A “will" as defined in clause(h) of Section (2) of Indian Succession
PvtLtd. Vrs. | Act, 1925 including any other testamentary disposition by whatever
fi":: Banket name called.
any
AIR 2014 (e) Any contract for sale or conveyance of immovable property or
Mad 103 interest in such property.
() Any such class of documents of transactions as may be notified by
the Central Govt in the official gazette.
(5) Every notification in sub-section 4 shall be laid before each House of
Parliament.

Section 2: DEFINITIONS
(a) "Access” with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions
means gaining “entry into”, “instructing or communicating with

Scanned with CamScanner

 Sexchax Tewari V. Shate 04 UP.
201l CrilLT1447F CAN-)
Ta fope Tecuded Comvessaken ~ ocun¥shle velevnat em'.qwm.;/
teanefore , 3k & adwisgle - , 2t @ ro Yested by unfourness , tang 2
5 exclude Hs evidlenc ¢ '
ww e
Cundl Pastbol V. Stke o} &8, Roljoustinas i
2016 CRLT 423@CReg): -
83 fotber
uiere e dape vecuster attoched G land Line felephone 91(1&:‘!'
tou decessed Shourd ba deemed & fua computero6
Veit retuled ontre Cassettes Mrowtd be tacated. o
ot
Verdbus povius o e (Thd-e
alodnonie Aoument, ar defored 4
o i Yox alss one of GekEbe Wsd 658 o EuilenuAct Buch £
eudene Sratd Do Bl inoduiselle .

Scanned with CamScanner

 Tue EcoNOMIC TIMEC

Couprs CAN RELY ON ELECTRONIc RECORDS

WIThoUr CERTIFICATE U/ 658 OF INDIAN EVOENCEAT
SudpeEmME CovAT
PTl FeBo4 20i%
S‘lwpm The Courte cRartprtatun Wil bawe an Wnpact on
Crtuinal teieda , whoo Catt dukedlc Yetads, cTv footag, mobile Uifep
Teodongs A Cbs ere being nelied oy
S e o of phisabinad Ontreasivg Adluce @
Compubesised Ve cuds ca Tudiuul protaedings , He Suprem Couy-
By fatd that tre Tegpicement
of o Gakrate & makean
eledvanie evience odnisgble o3 not Mandabry”, bererey
nkecest of Furtie A Jwkges’
T fop Cours Saniftabin o 658 of 1EAL
utich dsals Wik admisRboldy ) elettonte evilng 01 (ouy-
proctedings,Wit Rowe an Crpadte CRMINAL TRIALE Wy
an ChoMaslng Wuibts 8y Call defels otods, ceTV fvtag, Mol
Vidyy vetrdingg A g ace L&‘wfl Al pa .
Intesprekng Sechanbs (4)of e (EAdo bk ap
Twkus ACGOEL owd UV LAUT Lk proviewg Amtd e
opplred oy whan ek olednont evdena % presents by
Pon ubo i ona PBRe b produce Andh Aekaty, .
Sechn 65b Loy thab eledwnrc veuds neads b Lo
Cokiped byo pon ocoupping-a Espongible Officil P53 for
J&uwa,wfuflékle U evidene on - Crufy PT"WL:A&&
Tie 4op Cout , utiile xcuingy fhe (WL of Vidp
Tewduny b (Aime Actre O iy CD“”‘),JM(— Wik e quoston
oy elodwng evilsse Cone odu€ble fe nlomer o Judicag
g dy
P g o peesn B roknd pygiian pwdae
Stk o cnkfitate te Povgws 04658 Srautdl
ot b cpplect ~

Scanned with CamScanner

0N tao aduuiceseilily of tea el\ettwaicavplens
o pouy Ut % o Poresen ool fyom
dovuneitg produced. Swchparly Canno
Coifitabe e £ut ose
ups E5BC4) of
Ak,
akilo, 9 rew&mj‘\w-
Tue bop Couti- Aadh that toe applip
of Conkpeake Jiving proc ecinad “ CaunLo Alamed Ly Coud-
kfses”.
whonauee Onkecestop uskut fuo
Duning- wanotion Reaningo} Wb ieh
s, tne apex Cou-alsg esved b
Severod day
Pofie axd WMQATEM’EJQ, Lco Ak, 1981y —
Cavel Evdent Atk 1968 ard
ilily of ele
) /] . 4

Wi dea lt wit h e ad as eh
UK.
Dawe raw batn Tpeda o uef Hals o
Qrumsels aq
p o wn , g @ Lhabeuest W Ef
olectaonte Geduace, & Cokifate @ e
refoky
oconpuing o Tespuiable Pk
mfltml— AR o5 the Managemet G-
kg Cntended trak 3pine e
0 O
and Pduud by o pero Uy Wi l-vat - t Cakyy
ook w2 Gergnatef | voquivema
b A Mhh&g
van e hon Lop,
Sane edwieake Joggunt Bha
Supple
o EvdoneAd uryy AQPX‘DUJ}V\AL povkm” onteaded

Scanned with CamScanner

™ok Hy Yo" Lt onzLQaA’vg» Mw‘ Unperinake on an eletond
‘;‘:w,j Fgc:aus%ue U s Provesdig e WRinout fathes profo
Olwa—\v\i-
Tt Lonch Dok quonted tou Seasor lawges, whettar o
PUAD Wby ks b5 fake @ A2cowrse 84 alili tna ouearal
betad wittn t ol ap™ boaaling
pass” 03 o Flights) wtave there wiy
"W Agrabue @ W fwho puicbout R o Canpuler ; Gan the
dotument e nob Adlied byt Cour frrurund-o Swk ookt
Swilachy Coul Gowe otnstngy wtoden Bad L
Aupore o peran wrelies o a Cmpater-geaonabed Fececpt aca
bt opa dopastmestl Shie
, whih B Fvn M xdays ak evesy
Fvall and oy Arofs, G tne Cou Sy (et P aud Geb e
Q’ll\’bgtnl‘g v
N Mo g o quasians | ituch4 we ned & olelbiuiy
F banc Raid, axd odd the Courts Gunat aploati Do
occopruna O Aonck dbtoments [ wat-gt @ kjpare ws G5B
Bhuan Aoid ot te exdeae Lo accopted %L’a\‘N
Coutr awy lakes Aesk o voriton G bedicat labs G Ao
v W wy Yowperal o5 AoE.
Tue bepch 22 Sechm ASH O (E Ak Fm:edl»m(
provites AR i eleckaowie e O anthenkt ard releuat”
, Srlged &ty Sakafuiun
toe Bt G Cotoinly fie aduitied
Op Yo Contr 0 on Ao itk
U may daperd Authay
S Whoha Ho poson poduling Aot eheni @ (ha Posten
o fuanth Cnkfite ye 658% BN

Scanned with CamScanner

 65
TYPES OF CYBER CRIME,
(1) Crimes involved in fundamental breaches of personal or corporate
privacy, obtain digital information to blackmail a firm or individual.
This may be called crime of theft identity.
(2) Transaction based crimes such as fraud, trafficking in child
pomography, digital piracy, money laundering, counterfeiting etc.
This provides anonymity provided by internet.
(3) Crime involving individuals within Corporations or Government
bureaucracies deliberately altering data for either profit or political
objective.
(4) Crimes that involve attempt to disrupt the actual workings of the
Internet. Crime lie spam, hacking, denial of service attacks etc.
Internet being used to cause public disturbances and even death.
ism focuses upon the use of Internet by NON-STATE
ACTORS to affect the nation's economics and technological
infrastructure.

Offences under Chapter Xl are to be tried as per the provision of

Cr.P.C. They are triable either by JMFC or Court of Session.
SI.No. | Sections | Nature of Offence
of IT Act
1. 65 Tampering with Computer source documents
2 66 Dishonestly, fraudulently doing any computer
related offence.
3. |e6A Sending offensive _messages _through
communication service.
4. 668 Dishonestly receiving computer resource or
‘communication device.
5. 66C Identity theft
6. 66D Cheating by personation by using computer
sources.
7. B66E Violation of privacy. v
8. 66F CYBER TERRORISM
9. 67 Publishing information in electronic form which is
lascivious or appeals to prurient interest.
10. 67A Publishing or transmitting of material containing
sexually explicit act etc. in electronic form.
1. 678 Publishing or transmitting of material depicting
children in sexually explicit act etc. in electronic
form.
12. 67C Preservation and retention of information by
intermediaries.
13. 68(2) Intentionally or knowingly fails to comply with any
order of Controller. .
1. |69 ‘Subscriber or intermediary falls 1o intercept or
monitor or encrypt and information through any
computer source.
15. B69A - | When intermediary fails to block for public access
of any information through any computer resource.
16. 698 When intermediary fails to monitor and collect traffic

Scanned with CamScanner

=
oA Y 66
resource
data or information through any computer
17 75 for cyber security. secure acoes® toa
. ‘Secures access or aflempts to
protected system. facts.
T8 ol
Misrepresentation or suppression of materialgl
19
1. 72/ Breach of confidentialty and pivecy.
Disdlosure of information in breach of la
- |72A -
contract. Electronic Signature Centificate false in
21. |73 Publishing o
certain particulars. cerificate 100
2. (74 ‘Publication of Electronic_signature
purpose in contravention
fraudulent or unlawful
the Act committed outside India
23|76 Confiscation.
tried 25 per the _pwwa-ons";f
Following offences under L.P.C. will be Magistrate of
are triable by the Judicial
Cr.P.C. These offences
1% Class or the Court of Sessions.
of the Cyber offence
SiNo. | Section of | Nature .
LP.C. incorrect electronic
Public servant framing e o
1 167
rocord with intent
| Absconding to cause Iniu. fo
R 72 to avoid service of summons
2, or
_summons
3 73 Breventing _service of
_,_’W
electroh®
-
a 75 B fional omissionthe to_produce
/WKWW,
court that issued the
Tagord tiable in to produce the document.
summons or order triable by any magistrate.
I other cases it s _evidence. If
5. 192 S ioaing false_electronic
using evidence before a
for
committed
then it is triable by 2
judicial proceeding 1* Class.
Judicial Magistrate of
its
to prevent
6. 204 Destroying of ‘electronic record

7. |463 [Fogey document or electronic

8. 464 Making a false
record b4
register
9. 466 F‘argery ‘of record of court or public
etc.

10. 468 Forgery for cheating

Forgery for the purpose of harming
1. 469
reputation
or
12. 47 Using as genuine a forged document
electronic record.

B Knowingly possessing a forged document.

Counterfeiting device or mark used
for
.
3 authenticating document, electronic record.
3 ATTA Falsification of accounts.

Scanned with CamScanner

 CASES W g |TACT000 —
Ramesh Rejqopal V- Devi Polymers Ri-L1d -
201¢ Cei.LJ. 2339 (sc)
rs -
Sttt Cane tu appellant & o Direche o5 Devi lobywe
Duning daud otfuing wev beought on Tecoal Avat-tea ek
nal dinat Bove antinily 15 access tou Ganputer bpieuer
Computts NEWIL af tha Q. Nottwy 20 Aecud {7 Abo
Bifente Ufs 65 \T Ackoo ) @ the alligaben sy
Yo GanSofem
ot et any Compules fouae (ple Aan bon Cancgalled, dsbrspedt or
oltered
- The @t g applidas diknok Sawe gy Lithwmes
Cabonton wiile Cntlonivg thy 2lligqubmns 2 Yeopeck-op-o ot
offents - Tt GC hed , e G v wode oul 46 (Thek2we
aR) B0 & (TAS 2008 . Hence quashed] iy Cuiminal froceadings.

Sayed keijuddin V- Shdeof KD,

2008 Ceirl 34314 (AD)

| Nomge (N 6 Rilion
Gatud Gose b utes ol ok MOBILE [DENTIRGRR
c 3 Arsevediy ot at
@ phant
ELECTRONIC SEPIAL NURBER CECN) - 9t uws allegd thal
foowed ESN ar b weanawny
pelitaner
RN @n Glome 7 TATA
e Pl
IDICon SEQVICE , The peshiner Ploaded ok
haate o oo 10F Cma nit affene s inacy
g ted
ok & “Comgu ter’ es fie
2000, Bk Couli-Baldl ok SwoutPhug G & Guputes”2o Pekbuer
doipin Fien e Seckm 2006)()) of TR e o
Uy A2 Guilly @ s 65 \T ACk00

Scanned with CamScanner

 67

CYBER-STALKING AS A NEW OFFENCE:

Online user harasses and follows another, mostly women, through the
medium of computer and the internet. This is operated from chat rooms,
message boards or cyber cafes or other internet facilities on internet. The
police is resorting to Section 509 IPC to take action against cyber-stalker but it
seems to be inappropriate. 3 Shoutd i &axed ufs 364 D IPC for ShliVE.
CHAPTER XI Ace 3 op 2003 Seddn
Section 65: Tampering with Computer Source Documents.
- Whoever 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, shall be punished
with imprisonment up to 3 years or with fine which may extend up to 2 lakh
rupees, or with both.
Explanation: For this section, “Computer Source Code” means the
listing of programmes, computer commands, design and layout and
programme analysis of computer source in any form.
Example:
(1) Tampering of information stored in Bank's Computer.
In June,2001 RBI issued ieswed- regulation for Internet Banking, it
categorically directed all Banks to employ ETHICAL HACKERS prevent
breach of vulnerability in their system.

STANDARD BANK LONDON Ltd. Vrs. BANK OF TOKYO

Ltd.(1996)
1CTLRT17
This is an English Court ruling. In this case 3 telexes were sent to Bank
of London from Bank of Tokyo for several million dollars. Each telex contained
the “secret code”. Hence, Standard Bank gave the money. It was not notified
by Bank of Tokyo that its secret code is breached. Court held the
Responsibility lies with Bank of Tokyo and they have to compensate the
victim.
A2) Tampering with Electronic Signature by a Thief. .
The electronic signature does not come from a human hand but
from the cryptography. Hence, the entire responsibility is of the
person holding both keys to protect.
“Paul” a noted investigative journalist has his home burgled. His
Smart Card was stolen along with his P.C. containing personal
electronic organiser. Paul's electronic signature was recorded on
the Smart Card. Paul intimated the Credit Card company to
invalidate the Smart Card. But it failed to do so. A highly defamatory
article appeared in newspaper which was not sent by Paul but the
paper said they believed the “Electronic Signature” of Paul. The
Court held that his Credit Card company is liable to pay the
damages and punished for the offence committed.

Scanned with CamScanner

 ~
68
SECTION oNI?:r.‘
66 : prOel\rdsZUTER RELATED OFFENC
E:
n, dishonestly or fraudulently
Section 43, he shall
does any act referred t0 " '
Mhng_zooq i ith impri e
with fine & 5 lakhs ulrb:impir::r:“ O
Seckend2 _ 'Dishonestly’ as y 24 IP.C- whoever does anything With
intention of causing wrongd gain for one and, wrongful l0ss 1
another, is said to do that dishonestly.
“Fraudulently* s in 25 .P.C.. I he doss a hing with ntention
defraud but not otherwise.
king wit tem]. ”
[Previous Section 66: f)yrskno]w ing that he is likely to
Whoever wit:afhemigr:u;.rtv:| mz:‘g
n destroys 0.
or any perse
cause wrongful loss or damage to public source of
in 2 cOmPUIe!
deletes or alter any information residingit injuriousl
or utiity or affects y by any means
diminishes its value
ccommits hacking.
(5. VRS RIGGS ed hackers. Thez"n;clé:fl
USA. Case- g Niedorf were admitt
ert Rigg s and Crai e the amen_;in A
ed the computer to enhanc
Rob
into Bell South who design the computer of Bell South cwmy "t:e sgys s
system 911. Riggs ente
red
file that descri e
peoples’ passwords andargued ‘downloaded a text en shoul . er‘\1
def enc e lawy er that the information stol crime wmmlE g1i it
The le and hen ce no
as it was inta ngib ES117
considered “property” hacker was o get the scheme
The Court held that object%t of& be valuable, proprietory information. The
The Bell is ‘pro pert y” and
file. nfidential info rmat ion
law is clear that su
convicted the defendant. . ) .
JBRITISH HAC KER: whic h is a dan ger ous Viru ®, The viru s
e “virus” called Zeus v3 browsing net. It s wiped the on line
ewhen §victims weretheir on line banking account. It robbed
e e e system
1D :fi:usmme! and hijacked
eking ts before it was detected and
3000 on line ban k accoun .
3?7.’:%00 from about was not traced. 2 o
But the hacker was lost in
stopped. Action about £ 59.7 million
According to Finance Fraud
_
frauds.
2009 in on line fraud and another
PHONE HAGKIG,
£ 400
.
million was lost to credit card

house in London convicted and

On 4" July,2014 'an old Bailey Court COULSON,46, a former senior
imp ris onm e nt to ANDY
ordered 18 months r to the
H'S news empire and one time adviso
editor in RUPERT MURDOC
P.M. David Camero:on. by FREDCOHEN in
(i)VIRUS Computer “Virus” was first used
er virus programme. A
1984, when he published a paper on comput
es itself or repeats itself
computer virus like biological one replicat h
time and again. Virus are of many types like (i) File infector whic
are
infects a file (i) Partition sector virus or boost sector virus. Both
ain a
first part of any disk, hard disk or floppy etc. They cont
pro gra mme whic h is exec uted whe nev er the com put er is swit ched
on.
(i) WORMS: It is a programme in a network of computers, usin
BUG_S or FAS§WORD GAIN ACCESS to wmvmersp It do’es n(;!t
require interaction to spread because the “worm” needs no host

Scanned with CamScanner

 28 )
AT 2000 ( Before cnzsdnitet
SECTION 66
PREVioVs SYSTEN
The Bapdig W HACKING Wk CompuTER e B
§ Ga e o Ky ok
whaoves witn oo Cafert 5 pablic o @y Pekeo destogs
Aewrage RESIDINGLM A-COMP
UTER
alker INFORMATION S
ILTY. Ok AfPECT
o0 ! Tg VALUE cO UT erng |
coop
i E 05 o DmnishEs
=
counile fact
\T (NSURIOUSLY by ay Mot

teckakpt:
@3 fode haczes @)
ih axd on abelehy W/fimflm
KAIOWLEGE %’bauk vvw cabeat &
1{% M ficfi%flfi“efi . (2) co rE®s S woli
wf‘(
vl )
ec ek al og :& gu
adkviky u‘ .\f & on Setl6Lo0L
pee " mmfiofigifid— meubl ath destrackve anmus”,
ol
[T Ack 2000 - HatkihyAowe aubored enli Ganpui er
r wh o B &
W dein @i
angl
s o gwni
Lytr
wolitionly & Ganne una of \TAG-2e07
& L Convitt®d Ups 66
Qopinivl Ale dog - WA
Bp e @0 F r e Gt 2 la wk rupect o boy, -
it Epuonbau up ls
hin o Gm pi te r Ao fE un ce F gpicatly:/u'l%mao\tlofie;jo-‘;ml
A roorduirdmeds @ &Colerlecolde actes & o Gmpucllibewed ) afn mocksi
r oj ‘fi

wrse ook @ ok ottasivc

Lo \m;
t o OK RE NG 8 Ot tn s Loffuare - Shgiver Mwm,
i -
ro oftr Roftuare
accys o o tmpule

Scanned with CamScanner

 SIGNATURE

Weak 3 obnek 7 i
e a Gmpates ,
D
A bop of Do X
plec of woluare ol LWMWI%W
ekt af
H delml

¢ hokhesder " - EoCh

Kisgle attouatny prly, Ypun as 110
o
endivcdinod wochice undec
@ bot-

ny thalt fpo ,
o foe bechnaloAN
DEVICES THE cLoUdS
o&iivilfiwm
Lehweanfixt dawiery tewselve - fpal
6 a {-eu,,\.,(”%j
Cotecnelo} fong

o d d 0 T
Tug

1 w it k 0 t (c ey sn gle
us UR
olNItsNI 5 ot
o Lo Lghi oy
t Aphemsr , of-s&:yawafim
rawe Ww
ek /
/éymaz\b
Hpamatlols , Foort e, ad Graectet ahwg
wn dacbunit duite Gu e Gabeelld Tertely . L
elemot ap~a
Widgek n Guguling > & widgek U an
ch L USE R \W PE RF AE Tt dix pla gs oAfuamobuy
eapi rb Caferas-
o povider o APeutR W fo0ra8am)wean we
afplitads,
oith e Apoaby Splem (
¢ % @ sulkiwed ““““’u'& P2 CM*{)‘J‘M
ggfi ANBATE
kenbe P
aimaAdo Adobe Ine 12t
douelsped by-psihbengde Fla
offseonlly AHOPTS Sap sh n0Y) ap

| Blask g
bfana Fl cat o sy Y; omtear ; K
=

Scanned with CamScanner

 S R T

DEF-CoN Cone frm Warrgaug, vefercy te US Avmed forees i

Yeadsnose Conds W CDEECON).,
T forsk DEF CON Cnfereny toor play n Tany (992
% day wany abtesdets ab DEFCoN tholudp Campuber
A
potermt
) Foumabits | e, fdond Gout- enply
Loty ncearther, Audauts oy %mume:gzwwrilt
Catpsedc 0N Aoft,une
Compules cnchiterture, Bardive |
wadifoedas | Ondesere badge) ¢h
A DEF N 2007 @oets badg Cmeke $360,00 2
Pwdamc‘nCaohMj.

Scanned with CamScanner

GITWUB 7 whon over 100 millim developee Ape L
pbwae of doftuwnce Ggetner . pLAT Form FOR veRSION
Aowan) Otns
Sk & CoDE HOSTING

N T
AND CoL
R O
LAR L
ORA TIO N - 9+ lete
CO
Meweqm orl\drulm T
\0%,(1\“ o™ dm ,ww’fi,o.nb
Gkl etentals Like wgbmy)bm
2
WL AL gt qtt“‘d" free
F Youtanwe 0Mgariabn fr Lo with
t noposthontes-
et oncluder Aimted feabwes on frivet
Lof e
Rook KiE % a progmus & A Collechon of maliclouy
g Card|
voole that give a Hurest alhor ngmofe accens ay
Oven . Computs o5 Othor fpten -
ek & atlated |t iralivaw ibi Pdfrm fLefvpe a
/e( odd nag molupue
o bawedpor epledt ad V\Aln’falglfl
s-
i a> Vausomuare, bots belogyeg o beo jau
\awe am) w
BLAKHAT @ & Conputer NCLeC who wually Vidatwwistesmes, Wha
kgpital efbital Llandads- Y+ ontyrodes fum 1950
Lod guye hypally W bla foty ad qvde whak hats »
Levin WTNICE B ong gt Tock will knoun blace
Lo hateer - He s Y S bRuke] Ofbpctaimiral Cntie g - He
!
one Wl W WMokonala, 1BY
oc rw5 d A0 maju 0
over &jgé;wc
e ":"(%umjwam\lwq
i"_
_ad %fi’

Scanned with CamScanner

RECENT CASES oF HACKING

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY ComputERS

1, CyBER ATTAUK ON
Indian Amentian
9wy Toporb® ta Toner of Ind thok tro
, Dalkn Novrasn
Chadeat named Py Tha 21, to ottos Joshuah White
tup BoTNETS [mm
\‘P\euden\ ‘*‘“““a‘" & W'} owd opemking
W ) TN‘K&W
[MIXUN WM e Inkearet ‘JW’%'(IOT)A
Rutaers Univemsity. T Parebed the Spkn
wldiple Aowks o
pted e edunkopal
for doge atakneewd maltomly daru s
procass o bent o atwards Rubyocls Shvdlesd
V. diskadt Jodge accopter fbo plox o e @coud
e
0 Gpyithed unrdee Maia)s Roud a9 AbtaAcke

2+ AMERICAN MNAVAL SECRETS HAWKED

) or & allyd btvskmtounmm&mdem
He Aweritan "SeADRAGIN' #iMEn b Coubertu Sout Chanen oo
onVaan by Chira - Thoy Bave ali fordd Aevenl
Soral , Semanr awd Sonalsof NdluArg Atk S Cmgpted memagc -
Chiner tarqettae Cobachis Wkig On Waunt GremoGonbrend -
of Usk, oF movy A pekond dab on Rhade eland , NeafortCit y
T B Wual (ke whith canhero clifferest Subbarine,
ay arwy widta NM/&JLMV&, £Bl » CKVWM 4 weadtg

Towds of Sdan on 106 2015 Lol ek Koo

clofle U8 fen on Undostakrdes Werrfce ad aloo "Rkl s’
fi
ok Afdlen by ta Chintse Govk- hattzos ontdiad@ Plant
Supestontc ank- Ay masKYe Mot fruse en Rineaitaun Subrasines
Tea Waphirghso fork- Acpts Totleed Mool Canpaised 6468
;fi: MLLF Seo Do a welkop Kiprals cud
Ausor dak | Subronine AR Wi garvokin o Cygplograpue
Oformaby Siphans asd 4ot Muy Sabomartns Dovelspront Unik 3
elettange uarefrr (e

Scanned with CamScanner

 8 ~
\ND\AN kFEN
3.
<V
o eicho
byh d£
nueMengire {acked
o0xPtMwpp AOPo y it &S
e o 3.0 AvwB
y C s a
wndv - The UD
On\ press , Difesn Ml
o 6410[ ¢ R omp vepdd
h‘r', W
ey
befre NSG webEite 02 Kovead ekAf:\-
sk
uty - Thay pabd Jame Mebiiodaor?
Aty
PRt oggte
OA A webi -

et 3 2 acte Looddd vats fre Mallle

Lisdeno o AP @d.
::mm mmhjr mfi_&:/w U;u.%(;k%a; }w
Whan Wee @pm \l- 4 e Vorw atfotie App Billivg Mm
ally gds ch\m & ]
ad kut wirelen applivstin pobad aubwakic oul Usts
Holupe with
Mabde ltog 5 done aulpmatiall - Tyt
Pangud | Uscsiee , T el waney, T vrwal tethnolaggis
MP‘“‘“J“ by s Maibre - Tuy o vepurtedly offectd
U\O:J; @mwsueuu’flik S \\chpu Sky' Cf“lo\ Aukets
4,800 WU
AopHe otiold on ey, 3157 '“.M”M"T'fifl ;
i ord uiwo able B ate st on Seday, Tusk Hex o ) @
hyppe o Mew B pro
IN 2013 DATATHEFT ALL 3 Bn-Acouirs
5. YAkQ0 RECORTS
HAUED - y Offue
Bashon-baved chief Sewuil
WERE
Toswrof S ot
voveskdd ek 3kl accowns
64 Yohao Giled Cyber o ool ek Yakao uRo
e Jroted aud Py bt OF Sbtuned
VER2owE N Jue Yohduaeh
loktn over by

Scanned with CamScanner

 -~
mew taktlapng wide nvelgpkag e boeoth it Halpof
"
ovisle furestt out O Aweakd tu onfonrahin £fifen @ delwak
ntfde pastonr s 0 Cleas dort, pagmust oud dode, o baule accounk
owoln, Yabiy by alredy copurd s Gulas & donge
Wi Pamonrds -
ow Pe Af c W TW IT TER' DELETED
C. TR Bo ti ee d oud Utxke‘o!z
Juitte s ac cu sk wo
Tounps ore dire
o &u;w u:_”n ven Ww
The ormr IrOMoge
4T Aoosnak exst
fi?
b
bww;?w 7w on Usk obas medw «: e
s RO ¢ lod i
huntter CLos
vandocd Lok~ Wi e cude Sonatthad
e
tod @ ok Hous
Ljttes accowt?
th foes dest s Aaveth Meas¥s 7 Hod
® o 15 werle fteugs o fhod Srvughhoy
8 f
&Mwl{“—wawu?-&ma

Ao
\akooo TE Guctomen Supbat g

RIT STMILLION ACCHUNTS -

REVEALS Sole BAUL
7. UBER CRo of UBER \Hr:k.lmgnn‘
dabetted by MeW
o wws
Va la ri ck - @ % Otk 2016 X Bappend
Teou k
_ chaby wba Mapload of fa r G y Clatice Joe Sulliveu o)
ot Chio Se uu ik y the bwz. The E6o)
C
wi a Ba ck ed fur
fay oty Gy ot s to
ul a tg oy BI OD 00 0 2 TRNSHE f e lan otOniermosdan
UBER de usts Bocked - Tot Sho
qur batte 57 wilkan acto

Scanned with CamScanner

 o~

e v, Quad] oddy R0 o0
o
mbbite N
aumbos OF s e 000
ANBLUL Y 4
C WA @) fiu Acsue and L V\ww%q/efiioi: &
fay odiad o 17
s,
s Bet o Usw, . moUpeeeutlag frand - nferwralo
Yo
Tup hatkes qaned accest b popeforf ; Collodonde
allous ergnent
Shored g on GlkHub , @ Aeie tral Ubes «uwflallfva
on Softur e Co d-eT buo dhle I
whew mwm
?WM@,(
clond LUV
Seponite 5 the ooyYOUETE 7 T
-\omt%nb r:)q\ilakrs
d o n d v e r
an d wo de s da b
CEp Vbos Aatd W fimgman UV
&Wm
abken % y of Ub er mko/poet Serusd
gfi:? /
‘Z’f%“iw o : e orots thegta)
ey law Butt “m“%‘m'; oulstec Cn Juse -
oalhple Ouminal prsber o> cn wwd st encplogees fad

“NAYANA! HAS AGREED

ern uEn-tosTNGSOW FTRTOA UNLotk. GmpuTERS FROZEN
8. - Sourie 0¥ willion RAN

T Romsoree — K @0 EREBUS - fourgetted Groputus

alss wodtled £ & o ok
suaring Mitokoft Wirdows @) s
Vandial wedd wne g LINUE batd Sphas - Taay belooed
b G oroitel dake an 153 Lonsa Asvoc axd SlooNplCurdlekmanr
ol
kD wtbgtes - Stafhes Niugana e lom fbat
it the Aoticors, lowordg e o from By illin & led drib
$500000 al thovghet i Lot wuinute |t Bockor
Thiun . Updek adds tat i engarerrs
e rogotakon owowd
;\m on s 4 of reuvery dobi bt added W R -
el fake
i
an cor Mdeneat
e B Wt hfi ;%
0
as O
fim :fi m b
o penr ,
dRajed 4
Lo fod acrel on fu Loyet % expe&ct

Scanned with CamScanner

 _')'—

4. cuoEse Cyeer ESPONAGE GROUP | Coposo’

& N
a Zoffuace od -
9t atfackeed Forbes’&ife Vi
Kfi:
ok Mode WL Of CLVOXSENof R;&'sflfll% fobn Mw::a;:
by Cocloso .
vy vulneabk § explact holrevd G Rowe betn Created
te Rockea U
bl ot
Vulnenda
Tt uay pai wih & Sgpoarate
s Tt booly Aupped WDLET L2
& duter over windens mockint” |
promat Gun Bacuds 2¢ Nov 6 st Decenia, ull -
I Cosporsy Gtk 150t leteckalsoCocluso's onvolemat
ok W TMP()LHHQ hockingof
an) duscves that :
Lty Audd Witk vthes wolweure
Micaosorr Windaws PCs trak Visted nebuades oL
U mikthoag
ok by the Goep . Seunaily Sphon o
ectest
idt Bleps & romediat e On &k eal
|- Forbes toot Cnamcl foiled akbenpts 3
20 Yo ety nekomes uthimoktly )
dota - o Mok Ak s & & Spresd
pa tc he r Y
AV
M fim “nk m«dfi .
3&‘: %’ @fi J:n
otm kD
17 €¢ "a rd S e u n mzw ware! Cl onwlat
4 ?"|5 sd oyt Clinse Govo
S Co do so wie
tiag Hrowndvic o
for espiwoge -
< MareHmALDN
MILLIONS OF ANDROID PHONEC -
(0. MALWM)\HWS
by
tow ilb en Aed roi d Ava stP hones bowe beoa offetted :
Op 5
t gn en de s fak e cli tke (o advertresess .
o Malunce Ho woe tng about $300,000 a
1oty
Trt Molwac e W Lum Ko @ ]
m e W M . T m m fl -m
fixkh(r ottt Ak incorts
. whi th o {\@ e a4 Mabwuce as
HunmgeA 2t aveay
in le P pha nts sppakvg Splens & Batp
der p s ¢
ahsely
Conbrolees bl Conded—o Conbrol ove
dokockm gy G gvee o Bovd it Loy oxplotivg
Bard Reb - Toe Mol s gct Okl
pa dr ar ] op on di ny Apiem kigun 49
Cn older Voraws of s’ - TR larot vt of Ardpol & érounas
W
itk y bo
| Toll
d kot ey updat®s o Akt
*Mardhmallow® . Geogle velear

Scanned with CamScanner

 .
W ¢ fockled
MM than 108 Uibnsmdioloigey on speret ,@‘p;,:
S0 fos thec o % bowe chosed
WO M)\w(m::\?z Updotes e Acdracl
ttan

1. Qu
ALCOMM ciiPsETS INFECTED BY BUG .
Bt & an Angeitam Rrst et gives chapatts &
iy
o phone T fhowsy wee found N fp Loffene
CATION
sd le r GR AM IC S asdl INC ODE THAT CONTROLE CoMMUNTI
Po Phone ¢ Beplodioe?
oceses WWANTE onesale @
Debiane olifforast Pr t; qondiolly 1o able 5 Haxe wave @t
tha bug an alteteer b s dob e- Qua llc amin Rasre Owaled
overo. devite oud gui n acc es
e fexed vexeons in e
for oo buge @ £butd) b ws e t phore wokes an)
- e l da fi io bd Bt RISh uses oly 6 anlood
fpeksnisy Ty oloo adoised fp Andrid aw pe ] falling VR
opowbie et y 8 &
L ugle
the OR
aqpe etCUow)
ageta o0 WUmp hee -
(SN

5 molimes P e () Ggle
hm HeresE
1) Blotke Borty Pav
@ Slatiephua § @ WTCBlave epad KTC 10 LG 64,
& vy MBI ol (0 one placont
L6 65 an LG uo © Gy ST
ot o 2 0 o2 ploar 3
sy SamsusgST EdK @) Son
A CRY " RANSOMWARE ATTACK i
\1.\‘WANN
o Wana Cxfl}fi)rf)»O )WQ‘B
wana Grg () W&AMW
Decwpres % & £ CansomUo PrIganl fogebtindy ™
abtock vatry
Nimsoft Windws - On 12t 2017, alasger Cbos
A& v Jasnched L‘v\fq[kwr Wwore
150 Grutnies demanding TuMore Yoymods on leofiwmud_
bikapin- n 22 louag + T abtute Bpreads by moukRylenetbosy
ntha ding *Phiivg. ewai lstaid on unfeleled Speo. Gy
Compubes Wcm?”, Tap abtat Aas baen deratbd by Eupol oL
k

Scanned with CamScanner

 P
W\mm&“:nc.t&ul Tp_scoge&dd( O ol
0wt ap Yoo o Drctasks Nakaral s Hhsestos (NKS),, Fed B,
Deutee Bahnasd LATAR cichingy - Ottor Fomhs cA 2k lfi‘}"t
qq Coutter went olso wepelied & fave lean
.
atfocice ,
Lawe Rue
o belrored i use te Eternal Bt opplect
- H\.:MNA cry s
Wbl
l by VsWmeoft Covuntly afcaty (NSAD
whith= Wy dafopewsscny indou "T‘m}w% fopttune
fi"mff% Yotk 8 oy Valnerlidy fr Auppete
A8, Lptans (Wondows Usta asd laber porakony Bpstens) o bewn
Coued on 14 -3-%007 daloye &n oppbyany Keourdly wpdaky
0 fotegy St by Miewsoft
oy Legoy versans of Wirdows
(et Moy Wikt vulrgadte »
Sovomd deaurs Offer tho cwithnd weloue of the Tt
e on (204 a0l}, @ Teseschy Who blogs wndler b mant
"Ualueco Tech” accadeskally discovored what amountad i be
a' KILL Swirey” Raxe Coded onfte Mabuarce Wi
Arping &
otk e Aie of th aftactk . Rafihomngo Qane Aowtin Rag
frea Dis Loekule Bhofped toe ettt Spreodig an o unny
A:e:w ‘:ME x:;mt 4t ltoeady njeched Lptun |t
Llowe)
R offha entlol dnfecken ar gave fwe
Aefurive eaure, 5 be Mlo%:fiq Wocdehusde 7?.,:,;\%((31:“
Motk huoty 0 Al bR hod not ban atinikd & R Zaug
Ufert ay eliawbon » Gom unusual wave , Mt soft Created
Zeauniby althos for Seveal Wow-tnsapetd Versiug of Wwsoft
windows, nChndiig Windoos XP, Windout 8 a,3 windous Msver 2003 ,
T Twnroynda voptd Hab @ Gyhor Lound
Wikely Croditel with, Aelpiry § neutoliy {i‘lgw jtwiiifi;

Scanned with CamScanner

 .
YN
q u f @l
UG
Ros b, qu ru ey oo un el et
Wv}w § o Cougr docment Y
Al
b Sl
froncisco (Lasligas) .
Mo Habohne | @ 23y0sc ofel

Atb uin gy by t FBI G La oe gere mm”;fimflf

Wrm iy
(237

20ty od Tyt W Wm\wde)

ot plow behseen Tody Fanos iniile
*kMuh Co-ddpasdec,
asntber \f

accouds - e
Sipha wrey fun Dast “’
Ba(f"auimk
Mol upure m‘lMH\a

PETYA AND PET RWAP.

RANSOMWA—RE eo TaRLOMQURAR
t be o Varibsl of o pl
3¢
oF a[pers ke
by cmtnels
shute updatel easlivr 0n 10 e ks (18 PETYA
defeated T rontony Was
tha Sube Do deii lute
9t offectedo odpVkoctroniwoea eflensfik L‘b Mfii‘p the (0wt , I-ats0
r Rustown & pruducer
i
"C ’; "; &W RS W M W W W
M:;:zw EM
Cmpody Maersk fpact duxvuphn,
Rosnek ) Dorlsk Luippo¢ rgUc @ Treload - Foud ot Mondelez o)
R o 1603 ey -
DULA Pepes ot Baffeced oot
\0-3«1 fem ngwhofi}) oulued
mc«x{h&%wmwkg
mefhad b Alspthe TuSOMUE

Scanned with CamScanner

 69
nor user
programme. They do not need modem or a channel
interactions. It spreads in network of P.Cs.
Mail
Two major worm attacks were (i) the Chrismas Executive
worm of 1967 (ii) Morris Internet of 1998.
“LOVE BUG™
the
A decade ago a case of the virus entitied ‘I Love You™ appeared in
Hong Kong
computers of different national jurisdiction. It was first detected in
on May 1, 2000. Within 4 days it changed or mutated in 3 different
generations. It was the most rapidly spreading virus. It was so violent that A,it
forced the closure of computers of White House and U.S. State Deptt.
statistics shows that it affected about 3.1 million computers.
to
INDIAN CASE: ‘A’ and ‘B’ were software company and providing “websites”
clients charging a fee. ‘C' a website owner did not pay fee. They decided to
block it. They hung a board on the front page of the site that proclaimed “This
and
site is closed due to non-payment of bill" along with their email ID
filed a case of *hacking” against them. The Delhi Court under the
address. 'C
interpretation of Act held that if a service provider blocks a website as its
owner has not paid the rent for server it uses, it would fulfil the criteria
phrased in the Act as “diminishes its value or utility". The owners ‘A and ‘B’
were denied bail and sent to jail as it is a non-bailable offence of “hacking".
N.C.R.B. data shows there were 5683 cases, registered in the country
under IT Act which was about 122.5% jump in Cyber offence of 2012. Mostof
interestingly *hacking” was 60% followed by obscene or derogatory posts.
28%. g
SECTION 66A: PUNISHMENT FOR SENDING OFFENSIVE MESSAGES
THROUGH COMMUNICATION SERVICE ETC.
Any person who sends, by medns of a computer resource« o @
communication device-
(a) Any information that is grossly offensive or has menacingcharacter;
(b) Any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of
causing annoyance, inconvenience, dapger, obstruction, insult,
injpry, criminal intimidation, enpity, hafred o il il persistently by
making use of such computer resource or a communication device;
or
(c) Any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of
causing annoyance or inconvenience or to decgive or to mislead
the addressee or recipient about originef such messages,
Shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend
to 3 years with fine.
Explanation: For the purpose of this section, terms “electronic mail" and
“electronic mail message” means a message or information created or
transmitted or received on a computer, computer system, computer resource
or communication device including attachment in text, image, audio, video
and any other electronic form, which may be transmitting with the message.
The genealogy of this section may be traced back to section 10(2)(a) of
U.K. Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1935 which made it an offence to send
any message by telephone which is grossly offensive or an indecent,
obscene, or menacing character. This section was substantially reproduced
by section 66 of the U.K. Post Office Act, 1953.

Scanned with CamScanner

 70
66. PROHIBITI HONE
MESSAGE OR FALON SEOF TELSENEGDRAINGMSO;SEN ORIFAESE TELES
&VE
If any person-
(@ Se"lds any message by {elephone which is grossly offensiv® orot
an indecent, obscene, or menacing character, knows
gram which heoo
tele
sage by telephone, or any oya
(b) Sends any , mes
for purpose of causing ann
nce inconvenience
to be false and
on; of
needless anxiety to any other pers e
e calls without reasonable caus
() Persistently makes telephon
as aforesaid J excae;g?ing t o
£10
for any such purpose summ aril y convicted to fine qo(
He shall be liabl e on
for a tem not exceeding one
pounds or to imprisonment "
both. i British
aced by section of49 m”e’ ooi
This section in tum was repland
Act 1981 Sechor; 43
Telecommunication -
1984. In its present form 2003, which
Telecommunication Act ATION ACT
ion 127 of TEL ECO MMU NIC
Sect
relevant and which as followsUSE OF PUBLIC ELECTRONIC
127. IMP ROP ER
COMMUNICATIONS NET WORK. ! _
on s guilt y of an offence if he- ic r,omrnumcatmn
(1) A pers publ ic elec tron
r that is grossly
ns of a
(a) Sends by mea other
twork a message or ENE OR
CENT, OBSC
S;FENSNE. or gOF AN INDE
TER; or _
MENACING CHARAC
(b) CAUSES any mes sag e f matter to be so sent. e of causing
the pur pos
of an offence if, for
(2)A person is guilty NC E OR NEEDLESS AN
XIETY to
IN CO NV EN IE )
ANNOYANCE,
ano the r he- onic communica n
tio
(a) Sends by m eans of a public electr
ws to be false,
otwork, a message that he kno sent ; or
mes sag e to be
(b) Causes such a public electronic
iste ntly make s_ use of
(c) Pers
communications netw ork.
le,
under this section shall be liab
(3) A person guilty of an offence a term not
impr ison ment for
on summary conviction, to
not exceeding level 5 on the
exceeding 6 MONTHS or to a fine
standard scale, or to both.
in course
(4) Sub-section (1) and (2) do ot apply to anything done
Broa dcas t Act
?; providing a programme service (meaning the
90).
This Section along with 69A, section 79 and Information
Tec_hnology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules 2011 and Kerala
Pfil:;e_ Act Section 118(d) were challenged in the Supreme Court
of India.

Scanned with CamScanner

 TUE CASES HIGHLIGHTED NATURE OF GGA ITACT

pusky makert
1. A claps X1 ShwordLoteB 53] allegedly
oot P, Rarister Azam Khan on Socdd Mediz -
k. \umqr«a:wdm
Mrka
et o201 for
ar A pofore 6y Jodoupux Uvarstyy
Corulekirg emoll tok mowo cM Mantx Banecjee

wa, assertd fr poskrg- o Geetoon whon

3. Aeim Trvedi
Mo tozare weo [oyhtng o Gouphio <n20
a Ohjethirble
4. A Toustem Offusof UP. tap axTohd for pothip
ploto of Azam Khan -

wy abo [pied Chork U/s 60 TAck 000

5.k nowl s
Hools on Faueboie
8¢ pacendoc
fur poching o ONERHTRw AN
byt Gogunsts pokice -
\‘MH;MA:’J'MW
6. A pusin qowe an adurente Commanten
o P chdasbeson on Toitter an) arceote) & onel

.
7o T Shahen Dhada Orikuized
(o) Nov- 18,200 ok Palyrer ol
Twlfizmt's furgnd: e faterd i
O evaston Srind Affer €8t 2
- ar
o rees” Conw
Rl St csed Drodu's Undets chot
Pulv-ggh& es:Twy
ok No qranted ball Jodertn
e @aro, ta
q¥le
O Shete & aupork O S
L J:;gf;o Uk Hont minkery
Ap ons h:fmm“fizq
Q/WNI /Sw»w»ded s),
N::.'Lt,—ri b THANE ()
Wgncou ~T jrossfes
AY
2wy wWorhed - BoWB
PR T E
e Nov. g SP Aok M %M%u[’“q.gu}flk e gurls ‘G’-MTQ

Scanned with CamScanner

 6o AT AC 20 0 b B oc de ced by 14, Yark apfy,
puposer otk uje '
ask e pol ie & Ble ch os uc e vepor-.
Nov 30+ Sk ksmoa ntD Lo blundeced” asves, tss Mobarota &
S Ba yg ' Co
ad an fak en ag oi nt OW IG ol offeods .
oxlaon n rt Sled.
u(t— in Ca
Dec & - Closuee mp wt
reachvete Fb accp
Dec (& - Shakeon
Co us t ac ep h thy Choguee repo-
Jan 3 003«
(Nov1g, 20U
Shaneens Ppsy 1N EB
ds i Po at AU o wr skel wovinesB
© Evony dayy thrownon n Jo.aMad tu ml claafth - Fuoyont ot
Tt dog 5 one oifcia fl’sfliwbfiferta ot
Ko - W axe
Qe Cazy- WM& w TR0t o Quea
by chade ¢ b daph did ot Ao So Qukede -+ Repeet
2une Alene fir Ph ogelSirgh , hzad,
- To
2 eaned,nob gvey == Mot forad
| ob CHALLENGE R
Shrego Cinghal
CatkaG6n A uy fist Challesggredg byat-DU onspeved
o Hicd quea hn appiing layos Hhud
{}w,d\.
bf"‘ St dokoake OVer Cothin 66 A otk the &w»
Cowt Centureq
awre. n
fleq ta Cax O Dedki He, Uty posted Shrichuces -
Mako rastan bl b tre agriots 0N
orweR PE NTIONES
A mmon CAuSE
co | Gl Rifbls Sociely,
Libecty,
D Peoples Untn oy Gla Noarih wis o ol by U, Uk Gk
2) NGh Wt Taclum atn
2y hnfornec palsile Asgoen% dS

v) Mww& Dounel Own &4 o. Moo tous

Moukhchd - Com
6) A Pfith r\mv.A,“

Scanned with CamScanner

 7

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL/CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 167 OF 2012
Shreya Singhal Vrs. Union of India
Along with L
1. Wit Petition (Civil) No.21 of 2013
2. Writ Petition (Civil) No.23 of 2013
Wit Petition (Civil) No.97 of 2013
O AW

. Wit Petition (Criminal) No.199 of 2013

CEeNO

Wit Petition (Civil) No.217 of 2013

. Writ Petition (Criminal) No.222 of 2013
. Wit Petition (Criminal) No.225 of 2013
. Wit Petition (Civil) No.758 of 2014
. Writ Petition (Criminal) No.196 of 2014
Judgement issued on March 24,2015
Judges: J. CHELAMESWAR
R.F. NARIMAN.
The petitioners raised a large number of points as to the
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SECTION 66A.
(1) Section 66A infringes the fundamental right to free speech and
expression and not saved by any 8 subjects covered in Article
19(2).
(2) According to them the causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger,
obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill-
will are all outside purview of 19(2).
(3) Section 66A suffers from the VICE OF VAGUENESS because none
of the aforesaid terms are even attempted to be defined.
(4)A large number of innocent persons roped in by this secfion a list
was given to the court.
(5) The enforcement of the said section would really be an insidious
form of CENSORSHIP which impairs core value contained in Article
19(1)(@).
(6) In addition the said section has a chilling effect on FREEDOM OF
SPEECH and EXPRESSION. This also affect the rights of viewers
the benefit of many grey in terms of various points that could be
viewed over the internet.
(7) Petitioners also contended that their rights under ARTICLE 14 and
21 are BREACHED as there is no intelligible differentia between
those who use internet and those who by words spoken or written
used in other mediums of communications. To punish somebody
because he uses a'particular medium of communication is itself a
discriminatory object and would fall foul of Article 14 in any way.

The Leamed ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL Mr. Tushar

Mehta defended the Constitutionality of Section 66 A" He argued
that the legislature is in the best position to understand and

Scanned with CamScanner

 2 7
appreciate the NEEDS OF PEOPLEvlTne Court will, therefore,
is
interfere with the legislative process only when A STATUTE
clearly VIOLATIVE OF RIGHTS CONFERRED on Citizens under
of
Part Ill of the Constitution>There is a PRESUMPTION in favour
constitutionality of an enactment.YMere possibility of abuse of a
provision cannot be a ground to declare a provision invalid” Loose
language may have been used in section 66A to deal with NOVEL
METHODS OF DISTURBING oéher people’s RIGHTS BY USING
INTERNET as a tool to do so’ Further “VAGUENESS" is not a
ground to declare a statute unconstitutional if the statute is
otherwise legitimately competent and non-arbitrary.

The Court discussed the Article 19(1) (a).

ARTICLE 19: PROTECTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS REGARDING
FREEDOM OF SPEECH etc.
(1) All citizens shall have the right
(a) "to freedom of speech and expression”
(b) To assemble peaceably and without arms
(c) To form associations or unions or coop. Societies (97"
Amendment,2011)
(d) To move freely throughout the territory of India
(e) To reside and settle in any part of the territory of India and
() To practise any profession, o to carry on any questiss, trade or
business.
(2) [Substituted by Constitution (First Amendment) Act 1951, with
retrospect effect].
“Nothing in sub-clause(a) of clause (1) shall affect the (i) operation
of an existing law or (ii) prevent the state from making any law, in so
far as such law imposes REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS on the
exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the
16" interests of ““SOVEREIGNTY, and INTEGRITY" of India, (iii)
Amendmen A SECURITY OF STATE, (iv)2FRIENDLY, RELATIONS with
11963 FOREIGN STATES, (v PUBLIC ORDER (vijl DECENCY or (vii)
5 MORALITY or in (viiif'RELATION TO CONTEMPT OF COURT, (ix)
TDEFAMATION or (fi INCITEMENT TO AN OFFENCE."

The Court also discussed Preamble of Constitution of India inter alia

speaks offiberty of thought, xpression; belief, aith and‘Worship. It also says
that-India is a sovereign democratic republic. It cannot be over emphasized
that even in DEMOCRACY Viiberty of THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION is a
cardinal value that is of paramount significance under our constitutional
scheme.
The Supreme Court discussed what is the content of expression
“Freedom of Speech and Expression”. The court said there are 3 concepts
which are important to reach the meaning of this most “basic Human Rights”.
1. DISCUSSION
2. ADVOCACY
3. INCITEMENT

Scanned with CamScanner

The Court says 19(2)
The Court discussed about
comes into
7
effect when it reaches 3" stage.
#0.S. 1% AMENDMENT" which says,
v
“CONGRESS SHALL MAKE “NO LAW" WHICH ABRIDGES THE FREEDOM
OF SPEECH". The Court observed it is different from 19(1)(a) in certain
aspects. .
(1) Its absoluteness
(2) U.S. 1% amendment speaks of freedom of speech and of the Press
where as 19(1)(a) speaks of freedom of speech and expression.
(3) Speech may not be abridged in U.S. but our constitution reasonable
restrictions can be given.
(4) Our Constitution prescribes 8 designated matter under 19(2) which
impose restrictions of freedom of speech.
A. ARTICLE 19(1) (a).
The Court discussed the CHALLENGES made to 66A.

(1) Itis challenged on the ground that it casts the net very wide- “all
information” that is disseminated over the internet is included in
its reach.
But Court found definition of “information” in Section 2(V) of IT
Act 2000 is (i) inclusive (ii) it does not refer to the “content” of
the information can be.

The Court observed Section 66A ropes in all “Information”. It says it

may be scientific, literary, or artistic value, it may refer to current events, it
may be obscene or seditions. That such infc lion ma annoyance or
inconvenien i i out. It is clear that the
Right of People to know- THE MARKET PLACE OF IDEAS" — which internet
provides to persons of all kinds of what attracts 66A. There is no distinction
between “discussion” or “advocacy of a particular point of view which may be
annoying or inconvenience or grossly offensive to some and ‘incitement” by
such words lead to an imminent casual connection with PUBLIC ORDER,
security of States etc.
The Court held the PETITIONERS were right in saying the Section 66A
in creating an offence against persons who use the intemnet and annoy and
cause inconvenience to others very clearly affects the FREEDOM OF
SPEECH and EXPRESSION under ARTICLE 19(1)(a). L
The Supreme Court quotes Justice Jackson in “American
Communication Association Vrs Douds” 94 L. £d.925.
“THOUGHT CONTROL IS A COPY RIGHT OF TOTALITARIANISM,
and we have no claim to it. It is not the function of our Government to keep
the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
govt from falling into error, we could justify any censureship only when the
censhfs are better shielded against error than the censured.
B. Article 19(2):
One challenge to Section 66A made by the petitioners counsel is that
offence created by the said section has no proximate relation with any
of the 8 subject matter contained in Article 19(2). The State has
claimed that the said Section can be supported under the heads of
PUBLIC ORDER, DEFAMATION, INCITEMENT to an OFFENCE and
DECENCY and MORALITY.

Scanned with CamScanner

 74

Y
The Court discussed in that constitution is not open to state
to curtail freedom of speech to promote general public interest. The
Court also emphasized that restricts made “in the interests of public
order” must have reasonable relation to object to be achieved.
THE DISTINCTION DOES NOT IGNORE THE NECESSITY OF
INTIMATE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE ACT and the PUBLIC
ORDER SOUGHT TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE ACT.

NOTE: ARTICLE 19(2) : Substituted by Constitution (1% Amendment)

Act, 1951, Section 3 Clause (2) with retrospective effect.
6"Amendment
Constitution Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any
Amendment existing law, or prevent the state from making any law, in so far as such
Act, 1963 law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
Section 2 conferred by the said sub clause inthe interest of [THE
SOVEREIGNTY AND INTEGRITY QF lNDlAf’lhe security of the State,
rigndly relations with forelgn states,"public order.!degency of moraly,
or-in relation to contempt of court, "defamation or*incitement to an
offence.
Aticle 19 confers fundamental rights on CITIZENS. Art. 19(1) cannot
be claimed by any other person than CITIZENS only. A statutory Right .
— as distinguished from a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS- conferred on
persons or citizen is capable of being deprived or taken away by
legislation. The Fundamental Rights cannot be taken by legislation;
legislation can only impose reasonable restrictions on exercise of
Right.
DHARAM DUTT Vrs Union of India
AIR 2004 SC 1294
Article 19 is over ridden by Article 31A, 31B, 31C where these 3 articles
apply.
STATE OF MAHARASTRA Vrs BASANTI BAI
AIR 1986 SC 1466
vArticle 31A- SAVING OF LAW PROVIDING FOR ACQUISITION OF
ESTATES etc.
1* Amendment Act.
Article 30- Compulsory acquisition of property repealed by 44™ Amendment
Act 1978 or “Right to Property” taken out reinstituted as Art.300-A,
Article 31B- Validation of certain Acts and Regulations.
(Constitution 1*' Amendment) 1951
9" Schedule.
\Atticle 31C- Saving of Laws giving effect to certain directive principles.
(Constitution Amendment 25" 1971)
All or any part of Constitution Part IV
Constitution Amendment 42 1976
[Article 14 or Article 19 or Aticle 3]
Constitution Amendment 44™ 1978,
X In Kesavananda bharati case Vrs. State of Kerala
AIR (1973) 1 (Supp.) SCR 1
Declared the following portion invalid
“and any law containing a declaration that it is for giving effect to such policy
shall be called in question in any court or on the ground that it does not give
effect to such policy”

Scanned with CamScanner

 75

VArticle 31 D: Saving of laws in respect of anti-national activities.

Introduced by Amendment 42 1976.
Repealed by 44" Amendment Act, 1977.
This was decided in Supdt Central Prison, Fategarh Vrs. Ram Manohar Lohia-
[1960] 2 S.C.R. 821
The Supreme Court observed that this lays down the correct test. They
rejected the views of Advocate General that INSTIGATION of a single
individual not pay tax or dues is a spark which may in long run ignite a
revolutionary movement destroying public order.
+Reasonable Restrictions:
The Court has laid down “reasonable restrictions” in several cases like-
(a) Chintamani Rao Vrs. The State of M.P.
[1950] SCR 759
(b) State of Mdras Vrs V.G. Row
[1952] SCR 597
(c) Mohd. Faruk Vrs State of M.P. & others
[1970] 1 SCR 156
vThe Advocate General argued that print media, televisions serials and
movies etc are*pre censured and hence no statutory regulations for them but
in case of ‘internet” the rumours have a serious potential of creating a serious
\social disorder and can spread to trillions of people.
He also told the Court *Privacy” is easily invaded by the internet.
He said era of vinternet” has definite threat and requires more
restrictions and hence the law.
In case of Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Govt of
¥|ndia Vrs Cricket Association of Bengal. .
[1995] 2 SCC 161.
Decided that “If the right to freedom of speech and expression includes the
rights to disseminate information to as wide as a section of the population as
is possible, the access which enables the right to be so exercised is also an
integral part of the said right. The wider range of circulation of information or
its greater impact cannot restrict the content of the right nor can it justify its
denial”.
The virtues of the electronic media cannot become its enemies.

Public Order.
n Article 18(2) as it originally stood this sub head was conspicuously
absent.
The Supreme Court by Ramesh Thappar Vrs State of Madras
[1950] SCR 594
Court held that Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act as unconstitutional
and void. It held that “Public Order” has no direct connection with “Security of
State”.
Aftermath of this decision lead to constitutional Amendment and word
“Public Order” was added to 19(2) Article.
In Dr. Ram Hanohar Lohia Vrs. State of Bihar & others
[1966] 1 S.C.R. 709
The Court held that “it will appear that just as “Public Order in ruling of
this court earlier was said to comprehend disorders of less gravity than those
affecting “Security of State”, “Law and Order” also comprehends disorders of
less gravity than those affecting “Public order”. One has to imagine 3
concentric Circles. Law and order represents the largest circle, within which is

Scanned with CamScanner

 76
the next circle representing “Public Order” and smallest circle represents
“Security of State”.
In Arun Ghosh Vrs State of West Bengal
[1970] 3 S.CR. 288
impact
It gives example of one man stabbing another may not have any one
lly sensitiv e area if a man from
onlaw and order. But in a communa not affect
order but will
community stabs another then it may lead to law and
lady worker py a
“Security of the State”. It also gives example of molesting a
visitor in hotel and a person who molests girls in lonely places. Hence, itis to
be decided in each case the effect in each case individually.
The Court held that Section 66A makes no difference between MASS
DISSEMINATION AND DISSEMINATION TO ONE PERSON. Further the
Section does not require that it has tendency to disrupt public order.
Under Section 66A, the offence is complete by sending a message for
the purpose of causing annoyance, either “persistently’or otherwise without in
any manner impacting “public order".

Clear and Present Danger- Tendency to affect:

Supreme Court remembered Justice Holmes in SCHENCK Vrs U.S.A.

63 L. Ed. 470

This enunciated the clear and present danger as text as follows:

“....... the most stringent protection of Free Speech would not protect in
falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It does not even protect
a man from injunction against uttering that may have all the effect of force.
The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such
circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present
danger that they will bring about and substantive evils that congress has right
to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree”.
In S. Rangarajan Vrs P. Jagjivan and others
(1989) 2 SCC 574.
The Court held “our commitment of freedom of expression demands
that it cannot be suppressed unless the situations created by allowing the
freedom are pressing and community interest is endangered.
Supreme Court held ‘viewed at either by the stand point of the clear
and present danger test or the tendency to create public order, section 66A
would not pass muster as it has no element of any tendency to create public
order which ought to be an essential ingredient of the offence which it
creates.”
\/K{E‘FAMATION' It is defined in Section 499 I.P.C.
The Supreme Court held that it will be noticed that for something to be
“defamatory" “injury to reputation” is basic ingredient. Section 66A does not
concern itself with injury to reputation. Something may grossly offensive and
may annoy or be inconvenient to somebody without at all affecting his
reputation. It is clear therefore, that the section is not aimed at defamation
statements at all.

Scanned with CamScanner

 ¢ 1
+/INCITEMENT TO AN OFFENCE:
Equally, Section 66A has no proximate connection with incitement to
commit an offence. Firstly, the information disseminated over the internet
need not be information which "incites” anybody at all. Written words may be
sent that may be purely in the realm of “discussion”, or “advocacy" of a
“particular point of view". Further, the mere ,causing of annoyance,
Linconvenience, ,danger etc or being.grossly offensive or having a-menacing
character are not offences under Penal Code at all. They may be ingredients
of certain offences under the |P.C. but are not offences themselves. For,
these reasons, Section 66A has nothing to do with “incitement to an offence”.
The Section 66A severely curtails information that may be sent on internet
based on whether it is grossly offensive, annoying, inconvenient etc. are being
unrelated to any of 8 subject matters under Article 19(2) must therefore, fall
foul of Article 19(1)(a) and not being saved under Article 19(2) is declared as
unconstitutional.

/OECENCY OR MORALITY:
In Ranjit Udeshi Vrs State of Maharashtra
(1995) 1 S.CR. 65
This decision took a restrictive view of what would pass muster as not
being obscene.The Court followed the test which laid down in old English
judgement in HICKLIN'S CASE which was whether the tendency of matter
charged as obscene is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to
such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication of this sort may
fall.
In Director General, Doordarshan Vrs. Patwardhan
2006 (8) SCC 433
The Supreme Court did not take Hicklin Test as final but decided that a
material may be regarded as obscene if the average person applying
contemporary community standards would find that the subject matter taken
as a whole appeals to the prurient interest and that taken as a whole it
otherwise serious literary, artistic, political, educational or scientific value.
Section 66A cannot possibly be said to create an offence which falls
within the expression “decency” or “morality” in that what may be grossly
offensive or annoying under the section need not be obscene at all- in fact the
word “obscene” is conspicuous by its absence in Section 66A. Hence, the
Supreme Court held it to be unconstitutional.

\NAGUENESS:
Oxford: Uncertain or indefinite character or meaning
Imprecise in thought or expression.
The language used in Section 66A are vague. The terms which are
regarded as Vague are as follows and meaning in Conllins dictionary was
given.

“Offensive™ “Menace™ “Annoy’~ ‘“Annoyance’- ‘inconvenience’

“Danger” and “Obstruct’- *obstruction” and “Insult”.
We are several cases in which U.S. S.C. has repeatedly held in large
number of cases that where no reasonable standards are laid down to define

Scanned with CamScanner

 78
guilt in a section which creates an offence, and where there is no clear
guidance is given to either law abiding citizen or to authorities and Courts, a
Section which creates an offence which is vague must be struck down as
being arbitrary and unreasonable.

The Supreme Court sited:

State of Madhya Pradesh Vrs. Baldeo Prasad
[1961]1 S.C.R. 970 -
In this judgement an inclusive definition of the word ‘goonda” was held
to be vague and offence created by Section 4A of Goonda Act was, therefore,
violative of Article 19(1) (d) and (e) of the Constitution and was struck down.

Kartar Singh Vrs. State of Punjab

(1994) 3 SCC 569

It said, “itis the basic principle of legal jurisprudence that an enactment

is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined.
The Additional Solicitor General argued that the expressions that are
used in 66A may be incapable of any “Precise" definition but for that reason
they are not constitutionally vulnerable. But the Supreme Court dismissed
them with reasons.
Uttimately applying tests referred to in Chintaman Rao and V.G. Row
cases it is clear that Section 66A is ARBITRARILY, EXCESSIVELY and
DISPROPORTIONATELY invades the RIGHT OF SPEECH and upsets the
balance between such right and “reasonable restrictions” that may be
""., imposed on such rights.

’\;fl VCHILLING EFFECT and OVER BREADTH

The Supreme Court discussed several cases of U.S.A. and India in

which above subject have been widely discussed. They specially held two
Constitutional Benches in this regard.

(1) Kameshwar Prasad Vrs. The State of Bihar & Another

[1962] Suppl. 3 S.C.R. 369

It discussed Rule 4A of Govt of Bihar Govt Servants Conduct Rules,

1956 which states “ No Govt servant shall participate in any demonstration or
resort to any form of strike in connection with any matter pertaining to his
conditions of service”. The Court held that imposition of a blanket ban on all
demonstrations of whatever type- innocent as well as otherwise- and in
consequence its VALIDITY CANOOT BE UPHELD.
(2) Ram Manohar Lohia Case.
[1960] 2 S.C.R. 821

The Court went on to hold that remote disturbances of public order by

demonstration would fall outside Article 19(2).
Depending on these two verdicts the Supreme Court hela‘SA as invalid
on ground of chilling effect and over breadith.
The Court also rejected the view of Additional Solicitor General's view
hat “POSSIBILITY OF AN ACT BEING ABUSED IS NOT A GROUND TO
TEST ITS VALIDITY" it said present Govt's views may not be followed by next
Govtand even the present Govt may deffer from their promise.

Scanned with CamScanner

 79,
The Addiional Solicitor General argued that the Hon'ble
\/Efiun may apply ‘I ILITY". The Supreme Court
rejected the plea by saying that it is vague as it does not specify which part of
66A can be saved by it.
WARTICLE 14 : The petitioners point out that there is no“INTELLIGIBLE
DIFFERENTIA between the medium of print, broadcast and CATEGORY real live speech
as opposed to speech on the interet and therefore, new. OF
CRIMINAL OFFENCE cannot be made on this ground. The Section 86A for”
“defamation” punjshes for 3 years imprisonment as” opposed to “defamation
which has 2 yeal risonment. Also “defamation is a NON-COGNIZABLE
offence but in 66At is COGNIZABLE.
The Court held that “The intelligible differentia is clear™ the internet
gives any individual a platform which requires very little or no payment
through which to air his views. Something posted on a site or website travels
like lightening and can reach millions of persons all over the world.
Therefore, the Court held it is not invalid on ground of Article 14.
PROCEDURAL UNREASONABLENESS:
The Supreme Court showed how Cr.P.C. 95 96 and 196 give
protection and PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARD to “freedom of speech and
expression” but no such provision is there in L.T. Actor 66A.
However, the Court held that as they have already struck down 66A on
SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS, they need not decide procedural
unreasonableness aspect of the section.
Supreme Court in this case also looked into the constitutional validity of
(1) SECTION 118 OF KERALA ACT
(2) SECTION 69A OF L.T. ACT (Procedure and safeguards for
blocking for information by Public) Rules 2009.
(3) SECTION 79A and IT (INTERMEDIARY GUIDELINES)
Rules,2011.
But the final sur of their judgement held- *
OF IT. 2000 IS STRUCK DOWN IN ITS
ENTIRETY BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 18(1)(A) AND NOT
SAVED UNDER ARTICLE 19(2).
(2) SECTION 69 A and I.T. (PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARDS OF
BLOCKING FOR ACCESS OF INFORMATION BY PUBLIC)
ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID.
(3) SECTION 79 IS ALSO VALID SUBJECT TO SECTION 79 (3)(b)
and similarly the LT. (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules 2011 are
valid.
(4) Section 118 (d) of KERALA POLICE ACT is STRUCK DOWN
BEING VIOLATIVE of Article 19(a) and not saved by Article 19(2).

SECTION 66 B: Punishment for dishonestly receiving stolen computer

resources or communication device.
Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen computer resource
or communication device knowing or having reason to believe the same to be
stolen computer resource or communication device, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 3 years or
with fine which may extend to Rs.1 lakh or with both.
Section 24 IPC defines “DISHONESTLY" (wrongful gain and wrongful
loss).

Scanned with CamScanner

 s
Section 23 IPC defines gain” and “wrongful loss™.
“wrongful

SECTION 66 C: PUNISHMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION THEFT. ;

Whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly make use of the electronic
signature, password or any other unique identification feature of any other
person, shall be punished with imprisonmegt of either description for a term
‘which may extend to 3 years and fine upto Zlakh.
1. Fraudulent and Dishonestly make bse of Electronic Signature of any
person.
of any ter
2. “Password" in compu other person
3. Any other “Identificat ion”
feature of other persons
(a) In USA. there is unique SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER for various
activities and has many details of citizens.
(b) The stolen “Credit Card" can be taken for identity theft
(c) Credit Card number is used for identity.
Famous case of HEARTLAND CASE of U.SA.. This company acted as-
a *middleman” for 2,50,000 merchants. If a person spends $ 100 on pair of
shoes. The merchant keeps $ 97.50, Issuing Bank takes $1.65, Heartland will
get 50 cents, the Visa and Master Card would get 35 cents. In December
2007, a group of hackers broke into Heartland’s servers and accessed what
the U.S. Govt estimated to be 130 million Credit Card Members. Heartland
lost $ 55 million, pretax, on $ 1.7 billion in revenue for 12 months. Later on
“TOKENISATION" system was adopted. -
(d) Personal Identification Number(PIN) can also be a methodto steal identity.

SECTION 66 D : PUNISHMENT FOR CHEATING BY PERSONATION BY

USING COMPUTER RESOURCES.
Whoever, by means for any communication device or computer
resource cheats by personating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
descrip term which may extend
for a tion to 3 years and fine upto ¥ 1 lakh.
(a) Cheating by personation: by using (i) communication device or (ii)
computer resources. The person when assumes some character-or capacity. -
or authority with fraudulent intent, he is said to have impersonated himself by
cheatina.

Scanned with CamScanner

 Payc |
GGE PUNISHMENT FoR VIOKATION OF “RIvACY
& knguirgly @pfucts ,publisher
whoeves, nteskorolly ary pUs®
te Cmog o & privale arco o
o broaamits Ladex Ciruanshanty
Vidlahing
Conduat,
utout Ry o hes , Sl I puMYfl\m(
pPERSON
tha PRIWVACY OF THAT

cloa qenitls ol ks, bultotokefom,ale bre-

b ap St
% Doy’ op a P
e fatho B ot es th& Cnplerklily a0
0 ¥ Pe sa ll y fx br
72 op tw (T A 200 k Teceal, otk R
v 4 measr fx e o ot maberlss
oAy inpieroak | dovanesls o
mesntG Rl o
}B e
Seckm 61 ,E?A,G‘«
Vi t Ha Sl od ri c ma di n @ mesak o Sowcely -
Obortersins twho

Scanned with CamScanner

 FoR CYDER TERRORISM:
6GF PUNSHMENT
() Whoever, —
, SEC
GR IT URIYTY O
(A with atak § thoeten Ha ONITY, INTE
IG NT Y OF IND A or ©& gha dke TERROR On e paspleo
COUERE
ony Ao Of oyt pesple
6 aceess 5 asy auihoried
e
'LV edll
(i) demgvyec Castoasdani
ASowrce; of
pocsn B access Computer pputer AlSouste
hiag G prehale orocess a Com
(i) attenp
so lm ar wm m\ j w: xn imd acw® “}:;
‘”*?ul; a:;%-w \i @ oy Cunp
y
anesiny o using v
i) cnlvoddnt
i
yor > Gkelly
s huy meass oy Aonth Cndistk o i &
T caoe daokn06 UL & pusod o dowogear
f A 2
oc Akwuph @ Wnguiry tre
e Supp&liSo
Dy 5 Case dowofc & Aossugt ad
e utoncly affect
moaily
ookl & e Bfe o fl‘et\fi!Con“‘e )Lpe:i&:d weF0 . oc
hn Okkm
Csikesl ‘)\.\uw:
poaatetes& “‘u{!’:“i'g“ h‘
7' (8) ket & onbelifally agding b
outhpusak 2 acces
byt A Tm s o T
sty Aoth Coack Sbint
ot
A
s
o ; ’ \ [ Op te , 0 Foretp Relokws; o
mekw
,
%~%w‘q WM‘,«
admeri
Foined \m S%&wgsmtu;”m;mw
™
et e
hmw';:
TATES, o b ey
R e e l g N S
& with B
A R ‘ : Muma\vr
o in

Scanned with CamScanner

 chz

(@) whaores Comaeils or Contpirts o Commit Gyber Tonoatn

pusifeable wsth (mpaSosment el sy
ot At Do
Otend 15 Unpaitoomat o Lie -

CASE OF EDWARD SNOWDEN

ouny Undorgroducale
Edome Snowden dounnat Bove
Gollege dagrar + He wussed g dnaook Aot & Mangruckeosds -
@ Aan ap @ Bod b in Wi ty RO .
e Bop Aak
e B an Anolen Cm{xum wwd'/w) frwoes
t - G 201 3 Sna uid dn o Bired oy anN A
CIA emp log lggredat
HAMLTO R, afts poauiow e
Conkenchc , Booa. ALLEN - Snawden &Coced 145on o Aqorakfest
Wit DEL awd CUA
18 tests -
08 Sr as cl n Pl os i Ho ng lary aftes \eavtvg-
On Moy 20,2 eady Tus,
liy in Uowati o o
fus b ot oa Nsh faci uments & }me,m
ed Hr ow an ds Clasgifoed NSA dp
Yereal
in s G ORRDIAN w 0nd 2% THE WASHINGTON
2Cutorrok qwal atftsls
Gawe t flz%anvfw puflfuhu
wode
E NEwyoflKT\NES" .
3
oF susTICE wnsealed

Chacges 2304 s
ovt P"“{’“"Q&u' ,u*w%mm«a
Ack1917 ' ond ::b;iims 4o flow § me
ond
an
7} Ruastur authanit granted Aim a2tgle
20l6
ed i 3 Rugghei,oge
ahoss o xherdloo
o undidclused k <0

Scanned with CamScanner

“PENTAGON PAPERS' ook by DanieL ELSBERS o arll-r=24ly
Fuitted ¢ Eduined Onowelin foy done #ace. for ous Gorchbnkin
e
indeems ap AW oud Bk AMENDMENT Huan any one edse.
of US. -le
Federal Gow; twbd
fold e Ex ec on VE BR AN GH
pros b ust t do 4.
@3 Iu&nwkmdu of
Legshkve
uk je c} -’ &m vw ,g "" 'v (uv\ Aoy Ausen Called
RS k% r,
led o An g, o ub ss te blawer, adisslent o tradto
vanously Cal Aebate s over
disclosuce Bap, fuelled
an) o pah\fv(‘» U "\
and balowa bebwess
“lAst SURVEILLANCE | souT SERECy”
PRUUACY”
© AWTIONAL SECURTY" oxd” INEORATION d {N—“fiwsf(uvkvslumé
Uy dotwuents leaked veveal
Coppersbin uiths Hcee”
appocads wunBy USA LN intose (AsD) &) UMTED
Poxtrors e () AVSTRALA
of AvEEYES' - ¢
(CANADA (CGEC) oo

o NS
Bvam TUN Louret Cowdr ovdex m
%@) S Vepzon' uw gven &
i
n’ @’ it o4
e vopuastp NSA & gue Boudlus Infdoiprmkyabi 5 s datebose.
t vecuals o Anitas pron Tetod
phan phat cud
@ Susveillani @ Frovch el
inttengh seePUTlsICSg )AND thas e g HiGH PRORLE INDIVDUALS” e 1
URckd op BUSINESS -
ows. Ypr
. (5) " X-KEyscore"on analykuld ool that-all
esntk” - Sowdon w2y
Colecio 0 alaoase osgltarg dme in csbamd
GUA RDI AN o Ao y b top ovoodsfs Count
qp at aby e Prem\m-;* o Bl o
Cnefoading fedesal Judgo & Wity
pessonad e-wos) -

Scanned with CamScanner

 -
Py dntkak ARHC
mllses o onenls @)
(6) nsh vay docveky
, Ae aw th an y em ai k lp ba tt s tracking @ wappig
Catochs Iidks '
6 i phares -
bk
" Bo LL Rn ’ Wy o pr gr aee 4 N b5 egbe
(7) .
!&AJ mfiwfl o USh -
uuumm
NS A iy us in g (o ok s® £ poyqybeck” m Aant
®) v T pon poik taxgeks” for
by iken ek ad ve dk se rs
tnfs wd
skes® Susveillonat’s
Gov- Aacog o § bof UdecceGln oy Uatsg - TETE
@) NS vow RPNy

o Love Toheds
s” . N
og eR s
() pLhck PEARLT
& pe
Me do ui nt d i M a n d e RV Comanisgmer
NIGEF )
©O
veant Guaknies
- lLehvars USk ond Ao
Iy cl os uc ts - U8 v APEHEo Ranzil Fant,
dse G Srawdet Ssuwdd
ySh a wellap
Chana ,) G eema, nSpo
Moxico , bachh r ANGELA MERkEL S
y Ge gr an Co st ol lo
\eode , mish totebl V‘.LML" N wnocceptuble’ ond
Zasd * Speg
,lyDt cpiegel on 20l
Cooqaced NSk with cTASL - Athual 122 *Rgprgde 23
shafe cov esl el leothadenl NkHvugBod toaetiad
rustg ho wr boxd -
& On Jaby b, 200 presttud EvoRorALES
a (nfecenu O 40
& Bollivia Wiko Kod Beon odterding
Opurkrg Guntasor & Rusgin - He SofgeA® Ruggonn beoss

Scanned with CamScanner

 awrdgn
Be * ui lb iy 6 Can tiler coyret” Loy B Cr
the Ay unadd og bm;(‘bt esouted
Jl mg /@ xi pla se.
e GMJ\wA' Folluiy arthd o 5 aftes
rejotedly S fo
G hucta ord U cs G plave - Grundins
o, Sp0In 22 Thly deed ac Low |, Wy plart
akivod
o o Vilaheo Shasr aboord tu
5 fond ouk s Srunden
wbathe
ey Mowthd
o & 0 8 Rolcvin -
ewnder
Snpwden Qubnue 5 Lo e puto
Yuo Co un ts by U De pt -o f Tu ab in udlakog e
Chonycop et
pu ra e A k BT 0 N o ps pr y” Teut
Es Bard
Sowturs Wab USh G- by cegrioh Rk, J‘@W"‘""h doy Pkl L
Sninn oves cav;w *pfw
o by 7
upsSian CrR2eas
LB‘EA’M, 1801\21\/&7% Can~ B
N
ik Necwdng @ m::

horgd fir Oglis omonten o5 Lix vovealabws fave

wwhj fprecen celakonshep O UCk uits mAvy-
Sowed
Countr®

Tue Atk gvaste UStia

fo Gt TN wa
f kel shfesr ot
w-smww
N
inkerded T
ade i oy ure
whecc an bonaant Afulite A Aty
Cnbiidate Govt- OfFLR5Lo G
¥ o e Ak
i Lermovit abtolke 00 (N USk .
agamd-
Ac2002 Bl
07
-t

o S t o e t (S om e Foront) Tt
re n 8T e 2
Atk 200
crbosteplRn Lagilehn Anesbutr
&) TelotommniehiosFedond legiclaton dovs M Agonpially
whele
deatuith lnbeanet Cuve 2k does dealuith What & in vealily

Scanned with CamScanner

 P-yk-l1

a Lo bbbl Ot vl wmodern medium SeheduleLop

Yo SECURITY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (TERRORICM) ACT insetd

oonen Poub 53 cnls foa G Gps Act, eatctled * TenroRISH”.

Sochin Tatd defior “tonpttact’ b men atkin fallig Wit
B
Seckvo 466£ 100 4(2) -
Pussuask b et 10010) , ekt Temant Acks” o possan
@ tonoe act, uith
Gmnlls Qi offent Y the Do Lagogor i L.
of
Ko Donally o Anch an Bffe being Inpusonmant
Sechw 100-1(2) tempark atk meant
e
(&) St Sentwily cabert it Lonoudy Lreruple ;o Aetaoys2
electnnie Ayt includivg fout-not Lonita
() an Snfocwatun Spi
(i1) o tele tommunitahuns Aastem 5 o
(i) o fonandal Splan o
erenkul %”‘r/,t v
(V) o fyplean uncd for t Jalveny of
(V) o fplem und i, 05 by an ekl b ukbly ; or
() o Soyphean Ud e, o by, o trmasport Aplon -
t
popue Sechm 100200 Sbuos te Cuidchutimal bant o Att
ie s B @ bo mo nt to ck ’ Gr akintd Lg an 0o th
Dok 5.2 appb tn t
oo pa ve s f lefptere Sethn
Urfisth to ab is an
Yelakue & ( x ' a m w m att c.,,}t:p‘m
ed ap rl es
(002 (2 Abdw Poaats 0f allin' | WAy
OH‘\E{“‘(‘A‘NF .
o ks 500 Hucoat ollue , e
involve o Cogied ot wpuld nv
(W) Heatko . .
Comnmawmilal5inoF
ne
wi ng A el ec harvc Gmunitatin.
5 wodt
W)ECG’Z}) “:Flo;‘::;: f me dvests o to tem
Te in cl us in o n by W
endiober vewg eined velogntn
mi c Cm mu ni ta tn a” &k bfiu‘fll‘b\k al
tochy
* ¢fetha Wt Of G ‘Wg
taalng
sy h"‘m Cegulabin
tn
Gou-t4~ Hua Ca
6 FoMonknen ) fovde Condidfinal
o Mot ar

Scanned with CamScanner

 CASE OF TULIAN ASSANGE

putes Prigrassuner , publivhes

Tulian Assorge B A8 Buctralion Com o
o the Onraitakin
an o fowralat- He O cdib-in-Chief iy Roo o musntrsey,
bl e 2006 rasmed oy Wiki Leaks
fpr éounolftn cncluding AuRed and
Saun Adame
accolode
Martre Gellhorn Prizefs Toumoliew .
e Caws i podineatt On 2010 whon Wiki Leake
A MANNING.
puldshed a Aowes of leakt provided by CHELSE
Those leaks onchude
i “Collakeral Musles" video (Apad] 20i0) ~us Soldirs Sctded
@) The Afghanicthan warloge (Tugy 2010) o heltaree [

() The hogue lvag Weslgs (Cck 20l0)

(8 Cable Gate ¢ Nov. 2010) s (5) Guastaramo o (M)
Followirg aove puldabins, Ush founched = Crimnal
Irveshigatso tato wikiLaaty o) arked allied nebart Gand -
in &
Ty Nou. 2010, o_segoest Us bode fr Assoaq’s extrodii
Sweden ,uhone A fod ban qpestned e Qasliec over
Q‘wz,&ml\k\ of SAoyuel asanltad rape. Assoryt Cadonnes 1
hssan(C
deny te allegakius of @ Aoxuold asganlt and tape.
oftradted fuw Sualen
oxpressed Croeen foak Ao wndd be
& Ush. e b Aus pecaived mle On publitary Aecrel
Paneritun Documents - Assartt Lusvardlered himcelyy
Uk Mol on 7132000 cd u Bkl e 4o dowys Soflitony.

@leckn 2016 - ]
S

Scanned with CamScanner

216 InFoRaw TION” includes .
,Codey , Computesprdrome,
dake mestoge ,exk, A0, Sourd,Voite
Hobhunie and dakuses ac MCT fubn or Cnputer Aavated
D E\‘oke.

one leaks ¢ Tue b0l Dewsorake Naknal Cmmchrer e wadl

\M L 9r% a Calethunay DWe emoily Alolen by-tne Bkt
e Dotkerl aptrokng nder H peeadorwpm
20’erwia o Negd § & WEWNETE T
S Guecif
frovos , accurlivgb ondichment Courted out by ttre
MUE LLER INVESTIGATION - .

PodecTh e mails 3o Maxch 2016 Hu perenl eneil account 4

Toun Popesa ;o forwes wiite Howe du\@ - chodt ad daary
of ltctlany cLintont 2016 Vs presshestial Gunpoun - Ush-actwg
abinbated oo batath Tepukill b5 Rk CyberSpeong
Group “FANCY BEaR” allegedly 2unth ofa Rk Loty
ontelljone opensy >
y-
S PreaaGate” 4 a Cotpiragy unook weat-ving,
uping- ta 20l U presedental deckin Cyele - 9F Bas bean
Urhensively Apsoredited by wodlg g af Ogam
[ECAVAVIRTY wmm%h;;r D o ¥ pabes
Cone emal| wo belwan Mhoka 4 Janey Mefyanh

A P C“”‘%P')'!fi”‘i*' The Mem oge

dumed Mefanke faskng o porile fuadrecer - for
cinkn ) - _

Scanned with CamScanner

 ——
it w8 hewe. MeEnpars
Assowax CA 1987 began hotking” cunder
formned
- KwyflaowThA%"m“Pmssmea'
He uitty tuo oftwees called
o ‘&Au‘\\hfi Feoup Intesnabinal Sclbvecsives’
VENAYY,
(D PENTAGON @ MILNET B)
The howkd O
Weprions Comunssion , (6)Gn Bane
) NASK (5) hutmlas &yTELEComn REROA ,
MOTOROLA P PANRSONC fiv) zr Ush .
(1) Lock#HEED MARTN taba asd smmuwenfl
3 Aw
me :; e UM VT J} ; oi cw a op heiny OnVulued Cn WANK
% futbe
Cllogw vt Nadhons 46lFes) Jockat WA a2y
gy Mool Fedeod bl 1994
dndte Hht tadwe - reB D¢ appad)
with 31 coustsap oty AR bt (otrir 6 we da
1996 4 plheoctéd Guilhyof 25 <
b gon AV

e 200 VI
o Lebour bord o won NOT

i 2 vt
TFoloard
sgscanany Onbert
abgencr o Walicious o
Chitd Aol -
PUNKS (2w12) Aoy Boy
0t o Gama CyPHER
e tn be an el ,0 ux qr ea te st tool b'r\lLMV\uTul\m)
LaanorRid foc ki 4
toe gk dorguove
fap loatn tssposed G
ever A,
Votali bordapitm i base

US Camunii INVESTIGHTION
Afier WikiLenke velensd) i Hannivg Pata ), US
anffanitey hegen OVt ofaini unkileakg @ hssarge
v o Weut &5 Proe cak Akia wades Bepimage At 1917.
Peaanally on Mesa sdnd,
He 5 betng Iverkpetd by o Fedomdt Gred Fury
ING Gt
Virginds - % DoC 201l proecnh in CHELSEA MANNard ASSwrgt .
Masning
Tevealed dhe Oxistenceg chaklogt fehvoon
The CourtMachnt procodings won 94 byt Prosciake

Scanned with CamScanner

 &7
that WK Lot h%fi*%”w"% U“WM‘Q'\QJW:“ NI
I September 2016 Tuliow Assorge Lol that- Bo umld Auwsrender
B U8, axthonthes - Masning wre Grute o PARDoN' by
Proselent Obama .~ On (7~1—1o(7)mm¢ Soabeng wpy -
Commted by Oboma b Tyecs axd She & Currtukty Lbudule)
fpr @leason 115217 - Posarkc woikand A weprist-
o Clesmancy 0d § Lo feknd ubw moF occephe) , Bt be
Sefused 5 fowrcondes |
Tee VS taresbypbn & AR adbve o e

tko or Wb disclass cw«x? W

ofi?}}?tw&;fiwfvflmfly W:"%w@ MM:F smaolbvxw%
o exbeadil ik, Asgounge 0 begn Cnfone) Tn BELMARSH
THE ERIZI CASE OFUS
THE #6k FIRST MAN CHARGED WITH CYBER TERRPRISM -

fom AediT izt % & Gikaenof Kosovo -

ave jetred
According b Reutor about 100 I 200 Kosovaxs
\o1s uitte40 Willed &0 fox ;T eUS Tuckue depeh.
Sn Ockber 205 it lskhio
far chayd @ Quspett g temontsm an) Badkavg, e Lo
tn Malaysra caltd Avdit Featz( -
e Md&m Qo > Gradlored o mile S on oy
oguintf tomamem o Lone ) PasBouler ; e audturiie
arg Condemming the M‘N} prcke onducked & Supput-
sytonemtn apombos, prdally ¢ & ik fu foeskme
beak 4o o o by fuen Chagd wth CYBER TERROREN
MUt Foriz Rod provild Acretdata §
- At dad
o populay 1S MILTANT JUNALD HUSSAIN looa kuwy a Phime
,
Fven Nowmw )Q_N\B:\ addresses , Pszunals
" umbes oy 4,954 Us militeg an otber Gout- personnd, -
Fonizi © actuwd 64 doxing millogy pessonnel dokx uiits Hhg

Scanned with CamScanner

 - 6_

(518 masber & ad Rt

Locolier
Me specc intear. & Rufp fou
Sproodivgfoe nee Viw
e U3, Soldrecs
hossain postd adoka ks
o LK b5 o Sopogc Rlp Corlouining
wckndd
Tudthog : The Wyt
Aoieket daka ke oiltd
mww&»p\m,wd»ww
< we ace in g ewall
Qo wave W faxe owr Name o) oddene
\ghus & o
rotacding extothog
we axe Cnfrdesked dokn -awd Panking
f t0 oyt [Caliphaie] » Ut KLoon
Soldiens
pusoal Chfpnah akyous weks A four
Mlah wt SReke
\gl: m"fi‘%
Auguot
Hupsasn W KILLED ot te €od o4
Turodd
o He s wespubble
2015 i Us Famgctbed atcAaike in Syria
tn brost & camsyrovk
e weusuilony \SIL Sgodivzess
_WoLF" Shyte ottads TV photo Wit
M:f‘ck w6 wcall ay s dod
3
o Tt oo Lot o0
addaume - 100 A5 pabos GrUs
Ay Joarves o3 MWMW“M'
awled fpu doten0n 20187
[EIN7N
Fovi2t A &b Slolen Vg ooline
cnnased
o Sesves used Joy-an
fo Hord oy
accond dokn & about 106,000 paxple -
cotoil Comparg @ pessorod infprmako o 1,251 wilktoy
Outoy obith Fon® ot
*
) dbas Govt- pesaminel

S - T ol Loted
Wokmarl, U MWM
ceofth

M A a9
¢ Fesis whw elrgy Peado
Th3 Dir3actor Y v,

Scanned with CamScanner

 Kus
T ot omalbys o o w Seover Botkd byt
vte eKo gl s it fod broste)
Ta Ratk o eo sGoe selailer on August-
a wer acouk w4 ouka4 ls KiC, twhon a Seuunddy
Aume o tie -
ot oyt on Line vebailer delebd br fratay
tot Cnofan o
y Yecaivmwa Hoc
Siep see[an fumCaopomAoalsLONAover,
Calbvaw&useltt\‘mg
ker" .
mes
paser oA Qund toabat
Us agaks towed the furesterdy oy
Wy fun MALM SIA @l AdSH Fonlad w0 arcortey
orbediia B & ue,
Moloy fien, Pobix @ ke Femiaf uithy
e Fedond Gk vy obte & Lis a wen 0ha
YUN o fup Aeiacn
Keown Tononit TARIA HUMA
td an ot tt on aft end ecs ot e Draw WHhammad
obtenp
on Mo 015
koot Reld in Goxland Torad
Fois vy Chomd pr OrbesTemndg o
S, Easbean DR (oo 615in Vor ginta - W 682 sl aciseedgn
o Codockingy owuathis mosbes 0 UK, Tax(y Hu
BRITANI"
Wogwn 05" ABY Nuelim AL-
ornay Gorerd
Attk
pe-s
¢ }m" ww\l;u

S %%u- it § Shesloy e pedtnally

mi”“
Hleakgrale ifprmatus OF oV L% &Mfl‘fiu !Al
0 K
N
kt oel d
vndthardivd ndvnliaa’ TR floo bean At
Ao
et thoe & Ly Aonkoniedth
Seplewbr,
W G schadld 0
wn WPE 204 e Yo 4
It ey P e
Qrovp ol addiherd Gyoo K acusrs

R eor Tooke diclPadl

ac t Ferl
ed zd &
Feidoy, Sept 25

Scanned with CamScanner

 —7-

CASE OF MEHDI Ast MASROOR Bxsqu

Meldi Meoroor
lnveskyatars axt gavokony 1515 Fuates Raiwa
a Gufc-tn G oot
Bwy 24, S0y Woy Rave bfe
Uaing Sachia 27 O e Evilescs Ack and bruth caife doe
over i lotko £ ROW
@xp\’e»(wl on toe lv_ad h‘m»&%hflg

Bsoas 40 betn Chongd ander 10C Seckan 126, Wbty

Wi, Wog ing We s ago irs t o Coubry o alicane freesdly
dealls
rged it Seckan 1€ o 39 &4
t Sndin - te o aloo ban Cha
Sechio 66 (F) of ITACk 2000.
Onfanfe Ackviker (Peavestin) Adk and” emonttn -
b doalp il Cwdpiaty and Gyler
A fanive offitor Onvéokgalag fou G 51 , Lowygers €
. 161G % abanne
doret Azod Freaker trat axe Limed witinfhe UN
. Bl o M&mef
ok Lndes crdognakerol law

ML:,AA seeon
fadeistltan,B The Deobard
Non Conlipp
< Fon s st TN OF o Do I W lins:
TS gceopte Indien €
feli
Rave, AR T Sheninda cnvokpdoes o)

Scanned with CamScanner

 1oy
(ouVrS toarG \/fim T -
B
o porallel fafiran
rv
Cabi5phte Canpoubyad1515 @d fiae_,\fe‘w&o%v\_ St
Drasneg

&n,fl*%w/éa
Gave fr Cumm.; ead A
;Amv.fl, whtn 4wy (& o 20, ) prebably
* fos mfi ,m?ulsfit’”
tho 181 dodnot exah Alxyeas q .
Coborokn G-the Shatead ALlon Trabd e frotgee
oiTume 0158 (N

[ MoHAMMED lB aarimt TRZDAN] , Hyderdbod (AsE

&N&Pd opastmat
pessen (Q\Il’r%' o
o
- ol odds ard earnel
A Sl of Hydecekod 048 -
o Gands heabin ‘)foc 44
g & woat uakcharg the 193 ol\k&:
Engneerivg

K o ay Ae y Lo Al -Aueik” - b o2
iRTUAL PLOTTERS uo .hfl—&film-\ Qu
\bm
s o s Frmodia-
La\/az«lm bt
CtathD
ce & A o k Sr va - B
hoaiki's guidsu i g visa fr S affor bogeg
tod ap Ae y wi xk G lSI S fa nn [rdia - keAl
Adused Y
odoa it o
niw &
A MM% Darded Ofi‘/al NAMEs
Wy klted ad wflfi ; gaun Qeqatn
Tela
ec , Krin ssbeos Qlf
Agpectst Lravdl Toe Mo oodles quided 1o @ me
Vicropy',
* Winps oF
’
The Arowdlec Wm M )
o Mooy
on Ul & kolsidoStepe o
a p Do dh wa on ¢ Ao fhratosn
&
Wi, Yoadost intteuctd Sk anudd kal

tedk
an natt
ad Tothes t qunpbood - T qeup
w&lg\o\fl h%fmnfi(
l l bo = Hydooca oulels Moy nauded b LU VER - T Tmartis
ToTechchnlsdaata

Scanned with CamScanner

 e -

opomb
Yerond(& ever 8‘“”;13—& & recruile - 9t unl o Rove ban
fhe [ attock Cf\(\\cl )g&'l«
ag‘m
Yozdosl v axrestd almg with A3 7 acunilizhe
- 3 Auspette Cnbespalon
lost Tuse wd Hoeir plon ums Ahattered Group & bt
vouealey fhot 16 W in - Cli e foack Wttt
only Hooph WhTh
o Lone WoLves® aktutk Intenet G i sTiad
o Cypep ALMERS fr Ter mnitn gebcn bouch uith prft
16 agiatsant
dial. 09 use thtwn 0 Umeunfes - Toox d
rgnity - when e ydonbo
wopeing lodhind o wall of asoacci
por call” w0 dok ett d ) sted Hew Catdet B ly wonc
Dho cobeslotaltore Caade1S
Gogten foe aobinally %Mr
ay
Lokt -
let alwe desoille what thay Love | o}
e G > cnverkgetd Ly NeA ec B é\w« o Ggbo
kD Son - T
D ewd §edoun
S mm% ap Wweh -
Sodan O

G ONMAN
OF SAN BERNADINO
CASE
syEDd W RIZWAN FAROOK-
14 people on (lfornia
b Wk Klled N
Faxwk @ t s ©
Dl it fpolly ZhaAple Bellp Giromuet
.

fogeaphe
Suvies Aoth®
by defolt e, nly abehephfyesidoke
acces fe
whwmfix
T Code 2L NA@,MJM/M

Scanned with CamScanner

 Noowe oyen Al , 3 able & occest tie dokn myve
a — ‘
, wody
e Capony, Like Sovenl ofbar fech fime O Qubicn Vadle y
pllawry b Edvmed Srouden vevealobs UG Gt fusvedlona.
T Bl bos wok@ Angle B o b thoge
Isk 2wkt & altes Fawpk's CPhore Ao that 1
wndomihed abtempte ak tie W‘Qd(’
SV o @ C(::{)m
hrfl%&*Cap ’ ) .
Spur e wisk em&‘r},L.[ q, bewneat aww‘r\i mf““uti
o :;;uf&m\‘l b

ey Ji\;—:qim pas Cocde Cobinabing &’F MQ Zaure toppiny

0N MO W .
O
i wd‘p‘mom 5 ueducstnd & fowe wied @ Foue Dk
paked wosaing thorg ane 0,000 posdle Combepakus »

Kiple Soxe 5 Forall oavites Twiirg {058 0

105 dok Shitiong
lalog vareins @@ ARle wlrde pecfgn bea tie Ve by by
o~ veoporte & Go-ut Seash wercwds
n trat-G Ked
Oxbactd ane poted® by an encrypleKo
B e wser's passua rd Appbe doer Mt possess”
, uikth
d
Olpes Sowo phants , Onclncing Huoge paveced by Google Aokro
ontrece
also Cwplemeste Auah Alwdles w\fi?h“ bechaalogy,
o[qu_{mo . @
oG et wonserhile ot FB( Ao odered)
- Latos-
mhestaral 2l Bowkes b vadok He Cphareot dabualg cn
$Q{w(» Ay e otamg Soceonfd ad gawe
m;vkmaffimuhm.

Scanned with CamScanner

 TIMES OF INDIA
22, 2022
M, Sabunday ,Octdoor
BBCRE}
32 YEAR OLD MAHARASTRA TECHE GETe
LIFE 1MPRISONMENT FOR CYBERCRIME
Rebecca - Samesvel @ Kimec froup.com
MUMBAI« [ Hhe et CVAWMMM}M Convithin¢y States Gmputer
eer Anees Ansond Sonterted b ot~
::t;flrolm(f 21-10-22) for Colpiring Whfilmm al~
cn o4 -
Angican School o Bande Kunla” eomplex
Tie Agveuold Assarl wew accunrd e Planning.
5 uae THERWTE BB (1 b woly! aktack ow) oy
ban Dehind toe looxt Lo o Ock-18,21Y -
Bis arvest
Fonding Duim iy s UE)of TACk 2000, related b
AA;IOGLEWHL Aoid,,
Cybes ToMnlsm ) Seastrd Judg
e ‘maggwk‘m Bay proved trab Avcari Gnghived [
Comuit FMDAE atks and ackwhe @ prachd
preaced and popagated by basned tenonid outgat(s
The Tudge Raid oo prosekanfa proved tras
frum Cctabes 13-19 201y ) fosant wes Ca Congfeunk fpuck
with me Omi BLitaT onl Leading affeave Messepe
and deslipe @ banned 1S withe nbedt fo treaken
the unlly and Loveresyny-oy Indin ar b Afndia tevor
On pesple by wnautbotitedly Uaing £ Compaugs Canputs,
S e accwd fod pocured ofewvaden aboug-
™KL A THERMITE BOMB ond &hared Hwdata W“"fi“\fll\h
WRth OunR ELHAT in furtivorana @f Cogfpargay o Gunnitisy
o' L wolly bonl” ook at-an American Sehopl -+ » Wity
nbont b5 o Causgng cleafnaf Chuold ren
of furein kol
A uith modafode nbenkn af Causirg teonor -
- -+ added
e Tudge ) awarding Hhe IMARCI LU Lebene o hrqc\n(w}w
We 66(FITACE,2000 .
Msani, ad miswed o Cnpulersand tnbernet:
8¢ o privote Cucpau funs Wicking ak SEEPZ
whene sy

Scanned with CamScanner

D\Mpk}e Aeveral WAL . “....'lmt excooding He
eutivg &
&Varu}/:r‘:f
accens axd ey Hureat bt LWW%Z»
Oy Inlin ( 4 auccund) lad tre makher uithin 4o, Pusieey
8 OfberTermnten ) Said b Tode -
Seelung Upelerm , speviat
Pp. Madu
kas Daluf
Aard;Y Ty accwed 4 a wler esgineer,Ty sif-one.
W buphly 2kiled amd techwtad | whin £ux ORPECkNe Cauny
Dandyt. Coulorvg tou Jeuityad mogpuibide oty
Sfene iy lendeny B Aoun, it a poscietily
hl;;jmo‘ MG pubon ackan what-4 &,,,gqod\

Scanned with CamScanner

 o oo
¥ -

w (ee
: Fop | PUBLISHING OB TRANS MITTING
Sedrion 67 .PUMQHME”‘-
OBSCENE” MATERIAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM;
Whoeues PUBLISHES,OR TRANSHITE | 0B CAUsES To B PUBLICHE)
on TRARCHITTED Aa elethanilt fom | ony makendd
I, whith is lasdvious
2 or Appeals b i Prusten cibecest
m
3 on Wk effett 3 Sndh e @5 § Fend [;Aatm
ng vegard G ol velevank-
oud Corrupt porane wh axe Ll ) Jowd
tho mobtoe Couuined o
CocuunBbonw 5 Aed) L op Ruax
emhodied n
Onall Au Dunidhed on leb Covithsio uath Gnpronment-af
rs @ uith
ltter dusoipki fora ferm Uit kay enrod 5 Byee
entte
fone o, WU ooy opterd & 5lokhe aupas 0}
CRprimenatog
et gy Second o GuloAqpuint Emuchy uith
Other Aok fproteen whivh oy oxbesd b Syes )
6 0 fadde apers-
i % lowd ooklo ferlg
Lewd -Crode () LASAVIOVS™ i o Apgust dealte o orhith
’
?e,‘“mf‘:fwenh‘fiqr an oveskat o Offersive t{l\i V
fl Q&"
‘ \Astj.“'fl
Measy @ pUS® g
seuldeve Lopds % oxate EST ~ il
INNTT ERi
PRUNERT
' (b) ARPEALS ;a ) . fimfid*
2 y Souee fifi&a: m
&;
Mhmd:a‘@ WQM mfifl&;
:Nfijfif)A
da g
%L“*Mh
oot by Lot M”’mg
%&u\lnd
ey ‘:\M‘VEA;W;S;\ ch CO RR UP T PERSONS = moast
pa
“" ‘“ "f :“ M (c ) TEND \7 T wDEaRRAVEo
°°or“'wit“"ked-
t Sedso 292 19¢
0d Lot ON
Be re po re ) i
3 Tog G

Scanned with CamScanner

 In Setkwn 29> IPc the excopbus axe il o ank, Kedeny
MM% b ol abo wrqanngs ot Aewpler o chatizte oa '
Whath Godls e Yoo guk-
T At gro Yo puadboad foe (0 Pornogpapyy
ax) 0) OBSENITY -
]
(> PoroGoAWY: ) dafiued ar an exphit wnttog , pkuce
or clvor Makenl budel B arpue Borsd desive- |
Vsh |, fye 1 erothed Cortml Pomwlg e Commmnttodns |

Deconcy At 84 19% (e DAY

() OBSENITY: Sn Ush Mosy Gutr Lot qune W fi Coprese
Coudt . Supeone Gub Tk Sheundd once Lhaked drat &
Could pvbably wower acowatedy defje faxdO Pornogrply
bt AL knew b wbimaA faa W, opseanmyFer ban
wy
dafoned by tha UsS Supreme o

MILLER Vs CALIFORNIA wg(@)\

T4 ue, 15, 27 (1913) §
The Coutr Uaed tre MiceaTeer b aN.QJ G onfie Zxud
Opleatt makorid - Basgd o0 towe Cazo te 6 fwliined o

O, e
T wowdd
undes | By e e
e Y Ouierag pmw‘,a&flm Cbemporony
Communiby S daxds” ford wkk,hmagaw“[e,"fl“l
b b S pronsar beres ?
2 D toe e doihe o dapik it apet’
Oensine” ijwmt thats Apeuitally deponed
by axpliable sheteo 2
Scanned with CamScanner
 P-2

3 ety we faken an a Wl lack Leuduy hw,

okiske, padeked,o Acienkcpl vafu7"e -
Te Fedepal Sravyree aw
() Cowmnnlcatone Decumey et of 199
(2 Fedead Obscenily Skehuty - (g ye {1462
In s Socken Exprossions “ bk sher” o Toansut” Rowe notbeery
oned - Bk on Setm GGE (TAcka000 gven Afrihn ap
Tagtare - Thg wncariny Gan 4
® ,Rueleor’ @) Tranands”.
ot wp o a3 Beckn g well -
Sougkwmo s o P@mwm?% s arvhhes
el MCMW%WM A2 ar Awe prsonalwe s ML

Orcluded: Stoa folloning G dectesns o Couls e

qute Yelevast -

’7 199 (00 LT 2562) Rej-

The actund uar GO 200 -
Lelevisso wth Aalpg Vie-R Hemwm“z#»\kd we 252 IR
Toeocomed fled & ekt 2 T pithures obeffou
Ao Saping & N S
TLEL

Rice . Te ot W WE&: VULT

Bomhy HAHEE T o akn
T\AL{W Fl Robeilo \eke foan ™ all websites
wih
Lo a Gwp
anleet
65 e Dl ww?h chfmv:fi They vewred b pube bask etbw
S WEBSITES. Takiod CnlT aCtout fhe deffenng pleteqly
Scanned with CamScanner
 o whot ow b lacewouy o Pranient ‘any Cputy .
tuned down tha PIL,
Ranjit D. Udesh Vre State o Nabaxastn,
AR 1965 ¢¢ 8e) (&8S)
0 MY Gt Suprong Coutt feld ftab Zechn 292 (e %
Couskhubmally ld ap Astitle 192 waker en Sxphio m
ot on o crbecok o Rude Decesey! owd MORALTY", Setkr
03 o 1T Ak v Swdlor & 29200 0wd b Cueliudacall,
sheandy on sy hon Guaat L pafetd
Vil Mot anperch
by the " fresdumr 0
WICKLINTEST Badkvh Gase o Reqina V- ekl (186¢)
i Cakdier] -
Undes Weelon Tosk Cf any partop-the waktdbl
oy awhale Cnblereq Obscact -
‘slacont’ , fron pulditaban tho
Thong. b N PrOVTQn for poteaknl Jotiad ar ankefc
of At mabpudd - That
Valiat ol Wiy Very otuihve
o lefto ule vangeof wabeninds unprotecked”

Brewven Jr. faskientd bne tesk

S bs Cupe Tkt Wi-l Yanm@) RotlsTob o
that wlkwadedy would e bty
Roth s Memoixs Tesk - v Suwhseqpant Que on
MEMOIRS Ve MASSACHUSSETTS (1966) e appleed 3 dor e
o e en the Cupsage potar” YTy g ie? L
Ty g #
Yie V. Olwio (1964) ad MNewmo

depinod WyWi UTTERYb Gt Ooscne

mnakheeal Wk

Scanned with CamScanner

PoSTING OF ORSCENE MESSARES THROUGH SOCIAL NETWORK—

Bowak Bl Diguwmabni V- Govk- of NCT o Dellyi

2017 i LT 97F SC
9% Aand a1 Scope ot Seckun6] ITACT 2000 Chearly Apity
pusithawent fos pu&m&%\%w’ mak orizd o elednnit ferm.
ED‘MW«M‘, Binay Sarkac V- Stadeof W-Beoged
2016 Gild Ak
Spcl neburtang AR ~
G S M%F;k :Adtu e o Ngredieu
o poched Mctl;f

Losars tre oo C""“’Ww b

o ?M)M Mm&fi;‘mm )0 aqpoloncy
teogiiet o e LS OTE
iy o %MWMW‘&WMW
e R bod ot
o O O waboind ity ¥ com b
& Aagra)e““ elothnit Mmentag
75
erdtrtng Moich accusedn pateatly

wiuth doeoN
o vt g

Scanned with CamScanner

 81 \/
Miller Vrs California (413 US 15)
.S.A. Supreme Court held that obscenity was not protected by 1*
Amendment and established the “Miller” test for determining what constituted
(Material.
be nd to deprave and corrupt persons”: means “to lead someone to
oR

ions “Publishes” or “transmits” have not been defined, B

is enou‘gh if anybody publishes or transmits any

gifig or in possession of blue

p|cturss is not offence. n Ras to be proved that he may sell it or let it on

On a P.I.L. requestingAor a complets ban on all websites with sexual

Contents on internet. The

SECTION 67 A: PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OF

MATERIAL CONTAINING SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ACT ETC. IN ELECTRONIC
FORM.

Punishment 1* conviction: 5 years- Rs. 10 lakh

Punishment 2™ & other conviction-7 years- Rs. 10 lakh

Raju Thapa Vrs State of Uttarakhand

2014 Cr.L.J 324

Allegation that a teacher forcibly committed rape on a girl student and

teacher himself prepared the video clippings of naked part of the victim's
private area when he was committing rape. The clipping was circulated or
transmitted. The Sessions Judge found that the accused was guilty of offence
Ufs. 376 IPC and Section 67A of .T. Act. On appeal the High Court came to
the conclusion that it could not be considered that the rape was committed by
the accused and no one else, and therefore, benefit of doubt to accused. The
High Court said, case was reported after 2 years and no cogent or reliable
evidence was given that the accused himself recorded the video clippings and
that in video the person committing rape was not identifiable.

Scanned with CamScanner

 82

OF
SECTION 67 B: PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING
CHILDREN IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ACT ETC. IN
MATERIAL DEPICTING
ELECTRONIC FORM.

(a) Publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted

material in any electronic form which depicts children engaged in
sexually explicit act or conduct,
(b) Creates text or digital images, collects, seeks, browses, downloads,
advertises, promotes, exchanges or distributes, material in any
electronic form depicting children in obscene or indecent or sexually
explicit manner,
(c) Cultivates, entices or induces children on line relationship with one
or more children for and sexually explicit act or in a manner that
may offend a reasonable adult on computer resources or
(d) Facilitates abusing children on line or .
(e) Records in any electronic form own abuse or that of others
pertaining to sexually explicit act with children.

Punishment 1* conviction: Syears- ¥ 10lakh

Punishment 2™ & subsequent: 7 years- % 10 lakh

PROVIDED that provisions of Sec.67, 67A and 67 B does not extend to any
book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation or figure in
electronic form-
@) The publication of which is proved to be justified as being for the
public good, is in the interest of science, literature, art or
learning or other objects of general concern; or
(i) Which is kept or used for “bonafide” heritage or religious
purposes.

EXPLANATION: CHILDREN means a person who has not completed the age
of 18.
ARTILCE 34 OF U.N. CONVENTION OF THE RIGHTS OF CHILD, prohibits
the degrading treatment of children and explicitly requires the countries to
to
take “all appropriate national, bilateral, and multilateral measures
prevent.... The inducement, or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful
sexual activity.... And the exploitive use of children in pornographic
performances and materials.
A law against sexually explicit depiction of children is an exception to
the general trend towards greater permissiveness.
In UK. the “Protection of Children Act 1978" which was designed to
safeguard children from exploitation.
A series of increasing “Strict laws" in U.S.A. criminalises the
suggestive
possession of photographs of nude children, or children in sexually
poses, though similar pictures of adult would have been deemed merely
indecent rather than obscene.
“New York Vrs Ferber 1982
standards of
The Supreme Court of USA upheld the use of strict
that the Govt's interest in
obscenity in cases involving children, maintaining
protecting children was “compelling" and “surpassing”.

Scanned with CamScanner

 83
In India on 752010 Lt Colonel Jagmohan Balbir Singh was
arrested by Mumbai Police being intimated by German Police. The
Interpol
lraqed the server to India and CBI was intimated. On direction of CBI,
Mumbai
Police arrested and seized all the uploaded obscene pictures of
child porn.
VALIDITY OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY LAW IN USA.

1) US congress enacted the Communication Decency Act (CDA). It

was made unconstitutional on the ground that “aduit population” will
be forced to view which is fit for children and violates 1%
Amendment.
2) CHILD ON LINE PROTECTION ACT (COPA)- It was declared
unconstitutional by USA Supreme, Court in 1997.
3) CHILD. PORNOGRAPHY PRE&TION ACT OF 1996(CPPA)- It
was also declared unconstitutional by USA Supreme Court in 2002
4) CHILDREN'S INTERNET PROTECTION ACT 2000 was passed by
Congress and U.S. Supreme Court declared it to be valid and
constitutional in 2008. The law made it a crime to offer or solicit
sexually explicit image of children
PECBSE
PAEDOMILE,
PHILE &1= PEDOP
PEDo| UILE (INUS) =- A person wha <o Agyaally attvotted
Pedophilia means sexual perversion in whigh ehildren are the preferred
sexual objects. The intemet provides pedophiles
opportunity to commit criminal act through the use of “chatan rooms'to
unprecedented
and lure victims. The contract with “chidren” in chat room in order oidentify
meet
them “online’or “off line”.
This amounts to cultivating, enticing or inducing children to onfine
relationship with one or more children for and on sexually explicit act or in @
manner that may offend a reasonable adult on computer source.

SECTION 67 C: PRESERVATION AND RETENTION OF INFORMATION BY

INTERMEDIARIES:-
(1) Intermediary shall preserve and retain such information as may be
specified for such duration and in such manner and format as the Central
Govt may prescribe;
(2) Any intermediary who intentionally or knowingly contravenes the
provisions of sub-section (1) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a
term which may extend to 3 years and also liable to fine.

—> According to RULE 9(1) of I.T. (PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARD

FOR MONITORING AND COLLECTING TRAFFIC DATA OR
INFORMATION) RULES 2009, any person who “intentionally” or “knowingly”
“without authorisation” under rule 3(2) of the sub rule (1) of Rule 4-
(i)monitors or collects traffic data or information
(iattempts to monitor or collect traffic data or information or
(ili)authorises or assists any person to monitor or collect traffic data
or information.
In course of its occurrence or transmission at any place within India,
shall be proceeded against and punished accordingly under the
relevant provisions of Section 67C or any law for the time being in
force. E————
RULE 9 (4) provides that the details of monitored or collected traffic data or
information shall not be used or disclosed by intermediary or person in charge
of computer resource or any of its employees to any person other than the

Scanned with CamScanner

 84
intended recipient of the said information ur_|der sub rule (2)of Rule
4. He shall be punished as peer 67C or any other law in force. or
RULE 25 (1) — same rules have prohibited disclosure of |nle_roepted
monitored or decrypted information. It says that (1) the contents of intercepted
or monitored or stored or decrypted information shall not be used or disclosed
comput?r
by intermediary or any of its employees or persnan-c{wrge of
resource to any person other than the intended recipient of the said
X ; .
information under Rule 10.
RULE 25 (5) provides that any intermediary or ns_e_mpluyees or person in
charge of computer resources who contravenes provisions of these r_ules shall
be proceeded against and punished according to Section 67(C) of this Act.

SECTION 68: POWER OF CONTROLLER TO GIVE DIRECTION:

(1) Controller may by ordér direct a Certifying Authority or any
employee of Certifying Authority to take such measures or cease carrying on
such activities as specified in order if those are necessary to ensure
compliance with the provisions of this Act, rules, or any regulations made
there under.
(2) Any person who intentionally or knowingly fails to comply with any
order under sub section (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shallbe liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or a fine not exceeding ¥ 1
lakh rupees or both.
Section 31 and Section 33 (2) IT Act already have given punishment
for violation of this Act or rules.
Sankar Rao Mohite Vrs Burjor D. Engineer
AIR 1962 Bom. 198.

The Supreme Court held that the “disobedience” may be by an act or

omission.
The orders_of Controller must be very comprehensive and distinctly
shows which Act and rules are being violated for which such order was
passed.

Bihar State Electricity Board Vrs N.K. Tamakhuwala

AIR 1986 SC 1653.

In this case Supreme Court held that where a perusal of complaint did
not disclose any particular act or omission on constituting “disobedience” of
any direction of law, the complaint is to be quashed. .
° <
SECTION 69 : POWER TO ISSUE DIRECTINS FOR INTERCEPTION OR
MONITORING OR DECRYPTION OF ANY INFORMATION THROUGH ANY
COMPUTER RESOURCE.

(1) Govt of India or any State Govt or any officer if satisfied that it is
necessary or expedient to do in the interest of
(i) Sovereignty or (ii) Integrity of India or (i) Security of State or (iv)
Friendly relationship with foreign States or (v) Public order (vi) Defence of
India or (vii) for preventing incitement to the commission of a cognisable
offence (viii) for investigation of offence subject to sub section (2) for reasons
ta be recorded in writing, by order, direct any agency of the appropriate Govt
to intercept, monitor, or decrypt or cause to be intercepted or monitored or
decrypted any information generated, transmitted, received, or stored in any
computer resource. .

Scanned with CamScanner

 ROCK AGAINST AND ABUSE
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
(Racpa vk}
9t fnelps Vickme brsak Ailene - Trey oporate plbfiing
UAth, Sotid medin affeung cafermakin on fhy Cesuls
Augundivg chitd pordgaph, dcruol alie, an) allformg
O abue wAltAn Cluitol lnod - Thoy qlve o Aaft and Cujilenkal
ok pacnt- v Comtoet for vithme ap-abun Hhouth Cxpersened
Counsellors, who WU gatber onfparakin on acuc by Core
basie Wit regand& (oCol Lot Gooup s, Cux Conkeor
cudy Chitd prvhethin agencies. Tuoyalso offes Aupps &
Vichws ad f{i« iertacough Yo procemof Asputory
buk ad any protudey trak-wat follow.
wreaner Wareu Founparion
IWF
betk childien - Trty-ant ackive forover 287yea,
,mewrwp:ufly A »,M”f*w , thary & fobbas bocan
G utp chatd vckhw Apvod abex oy Aakong- o
and AQINIVONE Qi ON e elof 1 MUM\:
Grivinaly MM“
e (WN chatdran, tron
ity Ay cbuse WN
QWM “&W

Kedlled @) mansp
dongr w» ven Aab¥ oy ane
k%) \'00}&1‘9 B MV“?&‘I‘ M(SCHMM)

Scanned with CamScanner

 85
. (2) The procedure and safeguards subject to which such
interception or monitoring or decryption may be carried out, shall be such s
may be prescribed.
(3) The subscriber or intermediary or any person in charge of computer
resource shall, when called upon by any agency referred to in sub section(1)
extend all facilities and technical assistance to
(a) provide access to or secure access to the computer resource
generating, transmitting, receiving or storing such information; or
(b) intercept, monitor, or decrypt the information as the case may be or
(c) provide information stored in computer resource.
(4) The subscriber or intermediary or any person who fails to assist the
agency referred to in sub section (3) shall be punished with
IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS AND ALSO LIABLE TO FINE.

MEANING OF INTERCEPTION, OR MONITORING OR DECRYPTION ?

Interception- (1) Obstruct and prevent from continuing to a destination.
(2) Mathematics- the point at which a given line cuts a coordinate axis.
Definition given in rule 2(1) of I.T. Act (Procedure and Safeguards for
interception, monitoring and Decryption of information) Rules 2009.
(1) “Intercept” with its grammatical variations and cognate expression
means the aural relating to ear or sense of hearing or other acquisition of the
ool contents of any information through the use of any means, including an
— Rulakogls 0a% interception device, so as to make some or all of the contents of a information
. available to'person other than the senger or recipjent or intended recipient of
eaxirq+ the communication and includes,
(a) monitoring any such information by means of a monitqping device;
(b) viewing, examination or inspection of the contents of any direct or
indirect information; and
(c) diversion of any direct or indirect information from its destination to
. Menilor - another destination.
i obsesve
asd (2) “monitor” with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions,
Chewk oV includes
1o View or to inspect or listen to or record information by means of a
o monitoring device.
W <o (3) “decryption” means the process of conversion of information in non-
ii) Mozt |nte|llg|&le form to an intelligible form via a mathematical formula, code,
:{M password, or algorithm or combination thereof.
“!\?Wé‘h‘ “PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARDS" in Sub Section (2).
s et Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards and Interception,
Monitoring, and Decryption of Information) Rules,2009.
Rule 3: Authorised or competent authority
(i)Secretary of Home Affairs of Govt of India
(ii)Secretary of Home in State.
It shall not be issued below the rank of Jt. Secretary to Gowt. of India.
In case of "amegency" not below the rank of 1.G. of Police with prior
approval of Head or 2™ senior most officer of law and security enforcement
can order as competent Authority but report it to authorities within 3 working
day and obtain approval of such action within 7 working days otherwise it will
be stopped.
Rules 4 to 7, 9 to 10, 12 to 14, 16 to 21, 23,24,25 deal with details how
it is to be conducted.
Sub section (3) Subscriber or Intermediary to extend all facilities and
technical assistance as given in rule 24 and other rules.

Scanned with CamScanner

 86
Rule 25 prohibits disclosure of the intercepted or monitored or
decrypted information
SECTION 69 A: POWER TO ISSUE DIRCTIONS FOR BLOCKING FOR
PUBLIC ACCESS OF ANY INFORMATION THROUGH ANY COMPUTER
RESOURCE.
(1) where Central Gowt or its officer specially authorised by it in this
behalf is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient to do so, in the interest of
SOVEREIGNTY, INTEGRITY, DEFENCE OF INDIA, SECURITY OF STATE,
FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH FOREIGN STATES, or PUBLIC ORDER or
FOR PREVENTING INCITEMENT TO THE COMMISSION OF ANY COG
OFFENCE relating to above, it may subject to proviso of Sub section (2§ for
reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct any agency of the Govt. or
intermediary to block for access by the public, or cause to be blocked for
access by public any information generated, transmitted, received, stored or
hosted in any computer.
(2) The procedure and safeguards subject to which such blocking for
access by the public may be carried out, shall be such as may be prescribed.
(3) The intermediary who fails to comply with direction issued under
sub section (1) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may
extend to 7 years and shall be liable to fine.
The sub section (2) provides that procedure and safeguards subject to
which such blocking for access by public may be carried out shall be such as
may be prescribed. The Central Govt has made the L.T. (Procedure and
Safeguard for Blocking of Access of information by public) Rules 2009.
Rule 3: Central Govt will appoint an officer not the below the rank of
Joint Secretary as the “Designated” officer.
Rule 4: Every organisation shall appoint “Nodal Officers” and intimate
to Central Govt and put it in their website.
Rule 5: Nodal officer will request “Designated officer” or by an order of
Court to Designated officer he may direct any Agency of the Gowt. or
intermediary to block for access by public.
Rule 6 : An% Eerscn can request Nodal officer to block access by the
public, the Nodal officer after due consideration requests Designated officer to
block.
The Nodal officer can send request by e-mail or fax with his digital
signature or he can send a signed copy as well. Designated officer will give a
receipt within 24 hours. Rule 11 says Designated officer shall decide within 7
‘working days.
Rule 7 : A mo:%me decided by 'Designated officer’ with
representatives ( not w rank of Joint Secretary) in the Minj;«y of Law and
Justice, Home @#fairs, Information & Broddcasting and the Indian Gemputer
Emergency Response Team [70B(1)].
Rule 8 : Designated officer will issue nofice to the complained person
or Intermediary to give his explanation before the committee within 48 hours.
The committee will give its views which will be sent by the Designated officer
to Secretary in the Dept. of Information and Technology.
Rule 8(6): Designated officer after gettin roval of Secretary shall
direct any agency of the Govt or Intermediary to block the offending
information.
Rule 9 gives emergency provisions. In this case Designated officer will
approach Secretary | & T directly with his views and if approved by him he
can order the Intermediary to block without giving him opportunity to be heard.

Scanned with CamScanner

 INDIA GOUT. CRITICISES BBC’S MODY Docype
ntapy
AND BLOCKED THE EP1S0DEC

The ndfan Gut. by G0 o BBC clowuunenteny on P Modd2n)

s 20le tn tha 2002 Gujova subks
Tofin Forein miniktey £pkeoman Arindan Bagehs' Sl Indi!
The Mods @ueskn Latied Slejeckwily.
and vy
e forck forkop i fwo-part Leaker uiug oulred datetk
ues prood asted Mgk Ty
on Tuesrday « The Bocmopork
e B Sl U wwy Comumlite by b Uy Ownpertent-
U0 fam axvuund e benld”
O addeq toarte Incliunlovt- ey Sffered a nght boneply
but- ey dockned -
Ty et epreade tocke M Mali's fovat-Fepinty Pflfld‘\u)
Chcluling Auy ALt tuough te rouks 4 BTP to Az oppatatue
)t chagf-MinMer ap Gujiat-
mdm»utmfiewl.\% o pravdwy Unpud(ibed
wpoll Sbtosthid by tbe BEC fum BAXKGA Foregn Offee vtk
~Nais quodn odoub My, Modt's acken durtng-t Aelogiuuy
iots Hhat fod bAsken oub afftera tveintampig Hindu
Poligos toe clasy-before vaw Lot on five, Kallingrolazug - More
e 4,000 peaple moctly wumlons , clied On the out-butakap
vidlene , one 0y g Wexef SFnce MQWM,
Tug nprrtchoiduad at KMo v ® gy e
~Tble! -t Chawaleo Ompunsily? trab erabled fhe Vool ente -
e Moo fhayy fa\fi""fi@&d acuuokens trat
R fad
any e pnBlnfily for e Vplene and ™EApaliqdd for i
Mots « Sn20B oS¢ Pardl alip Rard Hung ubio Cnduthitdent—
ot & patate fon
e aponyd t B makve on
documonter wwt%ogsa”mm wp Wirdes bt Wflm
erentive and th agerda bl 1, K Boud
2Tt G popoganda piece dudined [ push
a IW\NW Alorecditel namakve. T by , e Lacte.of—

Scanned with CamScanner

© oy okt Continae f ot bt bt Voke—quiter,
o \ndiv Py Modl's quit- obayd vel o
sapiAasdvks’
i
o Guiant'c Leades &* alloued” edlots
o c\“\%m avhe § B¢ Soumalat recoundy MW’Q’"’YM%’
The todow Brpesg
Wedlnerday. , Fop 15, 1023
Underwhat Pourere By fae BBC Documutory
on P MODl fay bz loluoled 2
Teecivettme b blouety (-epitate o
e B QOWM‘W, “ l“fllfa’m“ofiél;«%h;,' whre 4
%mp,\;mf DR by 4t et ay Brad oy S,
o0 TV O emncntys unde
(T sy, .
Wbt axe s Ruggrs 9 ’
The Miwity brod (tugd dresbuy b
forepiiode o ba Dotuumeutuy ,\‘|m-,'mm“:;l w‘é}m b
on NouTube ; Onfperee] 20wy Ladtoy oy, C:raf;:
T Sotag whedia platfem Tivithe, uayy aded ZZM W;)m
than 5y twaks Contouima 9 ANKS 6 by Vingey o Youlie
the Lourets
Loy
v, rs%(w U Ombegeacy Dowe unde
T Ruley,c102 «
ek bas foeMl o oyAol| 8 o st
fecte) toy dpuum

i by 05+ Mopgicas oo
Slejeshihyard vaflerk 4 Goload windgel . Tig douneutu,,
wy b wode aveledle On Indiaby B8, Lk 4t wny aveglally
on YouTube for AumeKwe -
Sowseas Ao e AR O cink 0 mintnng, Oncduck
MEA, HoUE o 118 dawe opamiped e o(oum\ww an) fouy
Uk De Mah’wl‘ & Caste % Qpersions the
audivinsty and Crediillyo the SC o Indik ) Rgur ooy

Scanned with CamScanner

Bhjeckvily
) o a Grbuing. Golomtal mondl @, & blakoatly g
e added. . \‘\
na Lbteuoat-18: bryodGster Lo T oot \
Aoer exomine tie beaton bebwen Indiad's lkMuMAjM}r &3
Huplom Werdlly oy explive tue polikesof Mr. Wode pn ok
& 'rN»; teagon M -
Fua " Adg At ar) auntp TR of it
w083 Oporte o apprvated ,ard we Be
R g PO, nchiding teppanecfam plespl itz
o

The 00 Wy Part- 8-am Nqling 4

e Leoretay Jooc sm,aymm \?::ta M:’m
Vidlene uay MUCh Greatts Hrom Rpofte] Mapq o
vay & PurR Mualour fom Honetu anza,", ATt b
* Thne weg VA Leiw clous ok M Moge
Pl‘”fiq & paa proackve partin wu% loacte. foliy and focitly
Ucownging A Hindu Ofemists ; Thakugy o Poakoularly
egregivu Qrample of-pofiteol onvalvemaar Prevent fplize
fom L80g- froir po (T pled the g @t Hundog
WyChmul 6 My Shaw fuae] Aaghg-on e dowunentony |/
Epeakiy v whakackan fhe BRNRGou-. Gagg fuge
opbins - wee Lowted | wp e
Thtra ke 5 o Raid ,~The
vy qeoyty loreak diplomake Adlakate with Indiy , bubit&
Sbvipwly a Lhwn o) B Pud'e] veputnbon’
on Trwesday | bathvi DM, R Sunake szf:gpa-
N Jorluneuk by K v Bustarhn, if R0 ofrerd ¥
fim ) AE‘{‘ed@ oespntible furltw Violene and, ¥ that=
mave Lo e i flmw g Aa onvolvewat ol
Growe ooy ety eloantony?” ) »
M Sunake Lol We dordk blerale pee antan 3
but~ added trab { Be JUNE agreg WTHh He Mw«ho"od,kmw I

Scanned with CamScanner

T ooy awng Ve Indin Cusacie Jand hokte uiksulsctan
—Atoked allegadors Wq ackus o frey uvis. T lndix .
T decmtatong wo o ccustingly Boud b e
Undeemiety
nirg. So Soveredgndand ;
y begl y oy tndin D &aw\‘:g
“elabong

Scanned with CamScanner

ipee. asstuy 87
Rule 10: If Court has given direction, after getting certified copy
of order the Designated officer shall submit it to the Secretary, T Deptt and
initiate action as directed by the Court.
Rule 14 : REVIEW COMMITTEE shall meet at least once in 2 months.
and record its findings whether the directions issued under the rules are valid
or not. It can set aside orders and unblock the said information.
Rule 15 and 16 : The Designated officer shall keep all records in
electronic data base and also in a register. But he shall keep the requests and
complaints to be confidential.
“SAROJ MALLIK Vrs RAHUL P. SHAH"
Appeal No.9/2011 decided by CAT on 30.6.2011

The Cyber Appellate Tribunal directed Central Govt under Section 69 B

of IT Act to block the website of the respondent www.wireropeindia.com within
10 days. Secretary, IT through Director requested the Tribunal to amend its
order by stating Section 69A in place of 69B. The CAT changed its order and
the Govt blocked the website.
The CAT also held that appellant is the original owner of “wire Rope
(India). The website has wrongly registered in the name of respondent.
Hence, he was also violated section 43(b) and to be proceeded under Section
66 C(Identity theft) of I.T. Act.
SECTION 69 B : POWER TO AUTHORISE TO MONITOR AND COLLECT
TRAFFIC DATA OR INFORMATION THROUGH ANY COMPUTER
RESOURCE FOR CYBER SECURITY.

(1) Central Govt may authorise any agency to monitor and collect
traffic data or information,
(i) to enhance *cyber security”
(i for identification, analysis, and prevention of intrusion
(ii) spread of computer contaminant in the country
(2) Agency may call upon the Intermediary to provide Technical
Assistant.
(3) Procedure and safeguard of monitoring and collecting traffic
data or information shall be prescribed.
(4) Any intermediary intentionally or knowingly contravenes the
provision of sub section (2) shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to 3 years and shall be liable to fine.
“Computer Contaminant” as described in Section 43.
“Traffic Data” means any data identifying or purporting to identify
any person, computer system or computer network or location to or from
which the communication is or may be transmitted and includes
communication origin, destination, route, time, data, size, duration or type of
underlying service or any other information.
CYBER SECURITY:
(1) Theft of data from military secrets from govt camp.
(2) Vandalism by use of virus
(3) Fraud : Employees channelising funds to own account
(4) Invasion of Privacy: illegal access of protected financial or
medical data from a large data base.

Scanned with CamScanner

 38
“AGENCY" which may call upon the intermediary to provide
technical assistance. A "
The Indian computer Emergency Response Team is the national
agency for such purpose.
PROCEDURE AND SAFE GUARDS prescribed in the Information
Technology (Procedure and Safeguard for monitoring and collection Traffic
Data or Information) Rules 2009.
Rule 3(2) Competent Authority of Central Govt can order for such action.
Rule 7 : Review Committee finds directions issued under rule 3(2) are not
correct it will set aside the direction and issue orders to destroy the copies etc.
Rule 4(1) : Competent authority may authorize any agency of Govt for such
purpose.
The Govt has appointed “Indian Computer Emergency Response
Team" as its agency.
Rule 5 : Checks to be ensured that no unauthorized monitoring or collection of
traffic data or information does not take place and extreme secrecy is
maintained as it affects privacy of citizens.
Rule 8(1) Destruction of Records- after 9 months.
Rule 8(2) otherwise it can be preserved if required for investigation, criminal
complaint or legal proceedings.
vRule 9 (1) Prohibition of monitoring etc. without authorization.
/8% Rule 9 (3) Maintenance of secrecy.
Rule 11- Confidentiality of direction for monitoring etc. by competent authority.

SECTION 70 PROTECTED SYSTEM:

(1) The appropriate Govt may be notification in official gazette, declare
any, computer resource which directly or indirectly affects the facilty
of c&’x‘z‘fi‘n‘a‘l Information Infrastructure, to be a protected system.
“Critical Information Infrastructure” means the computer resource,
the incapacitation or destruction of which, shall have debilitating
impact on national se€urity, ecorlomy, public fealth or safety.
(2) The appropriate Govt may by order in writing, authorize the persons
who are authorized to access protected systems notified under sub
section (1).
(3) Any person who secures access or attempts to secure access to a
protected system in contravention of the provisions of this section
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to 10 years and shall be liable to fine.
(4) The Central Govt shall prescribe the information security practices
and procedures for such protected system.

Section 43: Unauthorised access — fine upto 1 crore rupees.

Section 66F — Adversely affect the critical Information infrastructure specified

u/s.70 shall be punishable with imprisonment of life.

Scanned with CamScanner

 89

F;u@ relating to Information Security Practices and Procedures for "such

Protected System”.
The I.T. (Procedure and safeguard for monitoring and collecting Traffic
Data or Information) Rules 2009 defines in 2(i) INFORMATION SECURITY
PRACTICES means implementation of security policies and standards in
order to minimize the Cyber Security Incidents and breaches.
Rule 3(1) and 2(g) provides that only competent Authority may issue
directions under section 69 B(3) for monitoring, undertaking forensic of
concerned computer resources as a part of investigation or internal audit of
information security practices in the computer resource.
Rule 9 (1) prohibits monitoring or collection of traffic data or information
without authorization.

SECTION 70 A : NATIONAL NODAL AGENCY:

(1) The Central Govt may by notification publish in official gazette,
designate any organization of the Govt. as the national nodal
agency in respect of critical Information Infrastructure Protection.
(2) National Nodal Agency designated under sub section (1) shall be
responsible for all measures including Research and Development
relating to protection of Critical Information Infrastructure.
(3) Manner of performing functions and duties of the agency referred to
in sub section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed.
As per section 70A the Central Govt designated the National Critical
Information _ Infrastructure _Protection Centre, Block Ill, JNU
Campus,
New Delhi- 110067, an organization under the National
Technical Research Organisation, as the Nodal Agency in respect
of Critical Information Infrastructure Protection.
The Central Govt framed the rules known as the “Information
Technology (National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection
Centre and Manner of Performing Functions and Duties) Rules 2013.
The technical units of Critical Information Infrastructure Protection
Centre or critical sector of the appropriate Govt and its agencies, shall
work cohesively in synergistic manner with the National Critical
Information Infrastructure Protection Centre for the protection of Critical
Information Infrastructure.

Rule 7 - the Nodal Agency may seek collaboration and support,

research development in accordance with Rules and procedure of Govt in this
regard from-
(i)Government Organisations
(i) bodies, institutes, departments, agencies, societies etc.
(iii)Institutes of eminence within or outside India
(iv)Body corporate and industry associations
(v)subject or domain experts.

Rule 4 lays down the functions and duties of Nodal Agency.

Scanned with CamScanner

 9 (!
Rule 5 (1) say the Nodal Agency will work in association with &
public nodal officers of criical sectors, Indian Computer Emergency L
Response team.

SECTION 70 B : INDIAN COMPUTER EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM TO

SERVE AS NATIONAL AGENCY FOR INCIDENT RESPONSE.
(1) The Central Govt shall by notification in the official gazette, appoint
an agency of the Govt to be called the Indian Computer Emergency
Response Team (CERT).
(2) The Central Govt shall provide the agency referred to above with a
Director General and such other officers and employees as may be
prescribed.

(3) The salary and allowances and terms and conditions of Director
General and other officers and employees shall be such as may be
prescribed.
(4) The Indian CERT shall serve as a National Agency for performing
the following functions in the area of Cyber Security-
(a) Collection, analysis and dissemination of information on cyber
incidents.
(b) Forecast and alerts of cyber security incidents
(c) Emergency measures for handling cyber security incidents
(d) Coordination of cyber incidents activities;
(e) Issue guidelines, advisories, vulnerability notes and white
papers relating to information security practices, procedures,
prevention, response and reporting of cyber incidents;
(f) Such other functions relating to cyber security as may be
prescribed.
(5) The manner of performing, functions, and duties of the agency
referred to above may be such as may be prescribed.
(6) For carrying out the provisions of sub section (4) the agency
referred to in sub section(1) may call for information and give
direction to the service providers, intermediaries, data gentres, body
corpoyate, and any other person.
(7) Any service provider, intermediaries, data centres, body corporate
or person who fails to provide the information called for or comply
with the direction under subsection (6) shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to 1 year or with fine
which may extend to Rs.1 lakh or both.
(8) No Court shall take cognizance of any offence under this section
except on a complaint made by an officer authorized in this behalf
by the agency referred to in sub-section (1)
The Gowvt has notified the Indian CERT, Dept of LT., Ministry of
Communication and 1.T., Govt of India, Electronic Niketan, 6, Central Govt
offices complex, New Delhi as the agency on 27.10.2009.
ey

Scanned with CamScanner

 T acchta Kend
C;hc\;,tbg{\a%qhq ad Maflul:;p kb Cutre)
55 o part-oy G0} Bl [ndis Inikabove” wndl by
tha Mindrheyoy Elechnis and [n@anabuy Tethnelogy (Heity)
to taak Gt Ayate by debeckving Lotwel onfreckuny
y Cleaning an) Lo Aecunig-
, eroble
00 Sodin and Wobl
Biptems o Ondwers R0 @ b prevent fustruninfedany.
The CSK % bting oprakd by the i,
Compukes Emeaety. RopinseTeam of Sodix (CERT-1n) for
g wolwake Ekwmw%u q&mugl;T; g,
BO/ Te
ik o Cik2ens for cemo aluew;
CypEen
erj oot gwbmcmg/wu Mvu\,fiiaw(
p. SWRCHEATA
aworg Cihasens 5 eowre fnodrolata
m@:&mk pkmju and duitny Bachas hon wulecs,
VE PARTNERS:

g
St Adunchoders Gan Rpurt-
om
tncileats jued
b i,SWier S
oy , bebomirasalyzoy
e w“:l:;,\hw
Sl U
el SW*“/“W‘““P"W e . Cue witl
N T T
pavide te Senit fret of ok ‘
9 ha wiur Wihunt) oy unogoold b:l»_amo\yr AN
dokoy
@a G uakagn Cimusuaitakin oot iy e Bpplesn , unikeskfed
amsuinghee , Aol Gnstalled ailivabuy/ Sftuac 2,with e AkCuber
VYw)
o Mo dun Ahowtd M Aconued
Cranwe o Roocute BLARRKs poveded fredly m—whflgby -
duresenc kv Verds® 7 dobes wfl:’m/lwh& Unfechenys
B ustr's Computeg asy S cnfected ly o bot-
W bt Omeork 5wl Lvor, uilont-AR / kanileddged

Scanned with CamScanner

 Cansent Cglogs Seundiuy Empandes , Law Exgrinait Ayontys
UGS CERT o e Auch ackvite, wiile onolyringo
what baigrkakg back malieims Asvet - Based o Aach oo,
ca,,up@k@limd ok a Ugex's 1P addsen """d’l* U\Tadu
N s bot/malunre
:"wcmméfléwk Sondy dotts 1604, 8pecdpng th (D addratey
Advocacy
ay-Infeckel Splons orkivh are Pantoy bobnet-and ong porfemiy
o nabuvny ackVike - 160 A reackour bty ouner(oof-
" infecked Shem(52 vin
Advocacy ai igal
e Belp of-regiten) 1P oddns .
rice itres WMA'

Ant-Corruption Helpdesk zp ~0A A NMVW%“ Cyber Swncchba P

Knowledgeqiub. |15 M(‘AM ),07% .

International Anti-Corruption Conference

Anti-Corruption Award

Updates

News
Blog
Press
Library

We use necessary cookies for core website functionality. We'd also like to use additional cookies
to offer 4.
Yyou a better browsing experience.

Accept all cookies

Set cookie preferences

Scanned with CamScanner

A §
The CERT protects India's IT assets against viruses and other
security threats. The Ministry of I.T. has undertaken several initiatives to
upgrade security standards such as STQC (Standardisation, Testing and
Quality Certification).
Information Technology (Salary, Allowances and Terms and Conditions
of service of D.G., Indian CERT) Rules 2012.
Rule 3 prescribes educational qualifications of D.G. and prescribes
experience also. He will continue there for 5 years.
Rule 5 — CERT will function for 24 hours for 365 days
Rule 6 — Advisory Committee formed. President is IT Secretary, GOl and
DG,CERT as Member Secretary.

SECTION 71 : PENALTY FOR MISREPRESENTATION:

Whoever makes any misrepresentation to, or suppresses any material

fact from the controller or the Certifying Authority for obtaining licence or
electronic signature certificate as the case may be shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years or with fine which may
extend to 1 lakh or both.

SECTION 72 : PENALTY FOR BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND

PRIVACY.
Save as otherwise provided in this Act, or any other law for the time
being in force, if any person who, in pursuance of any of the powers conferred
under this Act, rules and regulations made there under, has secured access
to any electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information,
documents or other material without consent of the person concerned
discloses them to any other person shall be punished with imprison which
may extend to 2 years or with fine which may extend to ¥1 lakh or both.
The Act has empowered the following to have access without consent
of person concerned.
Section 29(1)- (i) The Controller of Certifying Authorities, or
(ii)Any person authorized by Controller to exercise such power
Section 70(1) &(2)- (iii) Any person authorized by the appropriate Govt to
(Protected system) access protected system.

Rule 34(1) (iv)The operational staff of Certifying Authority shall

IT(Certiying Auth) _ exercise access to confidential information on a “need-to
Rule 2000 know” and “need to use basis”.

Access by such authorities are not offence but if they disclose to

another person, it will be an offence.
Any other person as mentioned above cannot have access without
consent of the person.

Scanned with CamScanner

 92
BREACH OF PRIVAC
Privacy consists of the right of a person to be left alone. Everyone has
a right to respect for his private and family life, his home, his correspondence,
electronic records etc.
No person has right to access to his electronic system without
consent. Authorised persons can have access but keep them secret and will
not disclose to others.
This right is to be distinguished from the right to speech and the right
to acquire information.
The internet has changed the concept of protecting the individual right
of privacy. He can, of course, with technical assistance can ensure privacy
to
some extent. These include (i) encryption (ii) anonymous remailers
(iii) proxy
servers (iv) Digital cash and (v) Smart cards. But they have their limitations
also

Malone Vrs Metropolitan Police Commissioner

(1979) 2 All E R 620
In this case the Court held that phone tapping
etc. during course of
investigation does not violate the right of privacy
.

Kharak Singh Vrs State of U.P.

AIR 1963 SC 1295

The Supreme Court recognized that there is a “right

of privacy” implicit
in the constitution under Article 21 which states,
“No person shall be deprived
of his life or personal liberty except according to
procedure established by
law”,
U.N. Human Rights Convention Agticle 17 of “International
Covenant
on Civil and Political Right” has protected a person
from arbitrary or unlawful
interference with his privacy, family, home, or correspondence
, nor to unlawful
attacks on his honour and reputation. "
Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 Article 12 says, “No
one
shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family,
home or
correspondence nor to attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has
the right to for protection of the law against such interferences or attacks.
The Prime Minister's “National Task Force on Information Technology
and Software Development” was established in May 1998. They submitt
ed an
Action Plan Relevant to Electronic Commerce to Prime Minister Vajpay
ee in
July 1998 calling for creation of “A National Policy on “Information Security”,
“Privacy” and “data protection Act, for handling of computerized data”.
Information Technology Act 2000 included the concept of penalty for breach
of “Confidentiality and Privacy” in Section 72 of the Act.

Scanned with CamScanner

'g 9
BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
Any person who discloses such electronic records, books etc. to
another person is said to have committed the offence of breach of
confidentiality.
Rule 22 of Schedule Il of I.T.(Certifying Authority) Rules 2000 which
relates to security guidelines of Certifying Authority provided as under-
(1) Procedures and security controls to protect the “privacy and
confidentiality” of subscriber’s data, under Certifying Authority's custody shall
be implemented. Confidential information provided by the subscriber must not
be disclosed to a third party without the subscriber's consent, unless the
information is required to be disclosed under the law or a Court order.
(2) Data on the usage of the Digital Signature Certificates by subscriber
and other transactional data relating to the subscriber's activities generated by
the Certifying Authority in the course of its operation shall be protected to
ensure subscriber’s “Privacy”.
(3) A secure communication channel between the Certifying Authority
and its subscribers shall be established to ensure the authenticity, integrity,
and confidentiality of the exchanges (eg. Transmission of Digital Signature
Certificate, password, private key) during the digital signature certificate
issuance process.

“RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE"

This right has been extended to provide the individual with at least
some control over information about himself, including fik kept in schools,
ACT
employers, credit bureaus and Govt. agencies. Under U.S. “PRIVACY
to
OF 1974" individuals are guaranteed access to many Govt files pertaining
from
themselves, and agencies of Govt that maintain such files are prohibited
information, except under Court’s order and certain limited
disclosing personal
circumstances.

GOOGLE ACCUSED OF BREACH OF PRIVACY:

the search
Google employees are taking photograph for Google Maps,
fire in
engine's map page. The “street view service” has recently come under
ntly picked up
several countries. The company admitted that it inadverte
data from some unencryp ted wi-fi services over several years. In
personal
2010 Australian Police has started an investigation.

OF INFORMATION IN
SECTION 72 A: PUNISHMENT FOR DISCLOSURE
BREACH OF LAWFUL CONTRACT:
law for the time
Save as otherwise provided in this Act or any other
g
being in force, any person including an intermediary who, while providin
any
secured access to
services under the terms of LAWFUL CONTRACT has
ng “persona l informat ion” about another person, with the
material containi
loss or wrongful
intent to cause or knowingly that he is likely to cause wrongful
breach of lawful
gain discloses, without consent of the person concern, or in
to any other person, shall be punished with
contract, such material

Scanned with CamScanner

 94
imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years or with fine upto ¥ 5
lakh or with both. )
Section 10A, 11 and 13 of LT. At deal with legal recognition of
contracts formed through an electronic medium. Hence, Intermediary is under
a legal contract with the subscriber.
The Intermediary can be prosecuted also under CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT, 1986 the consumer can file with the Court for
“deficiency of service”.
Section 39 of SPECIFIC RELEIF ACT, 1963 provides that a person
can claim temporary or permanent injunction against unauthorized disclosure
of confidential information.

SECTION 73 : PENALTY FOR PUBLISHING ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE

CERTIFICATE FALSE IN CERTAIN PATICULAR:
(1) No person shall publish a electronic signature certificate or
otherwise make it available to any other person with the knowledge that -
(a) The Certifying Authority listed in the certificate has not issued it; or
(b) the subscriber listed in the certificate has not accepted it; or
(c) the certificate is revoked or suspended, unless such publication is
for the purpose of verifying a electronic signature created prior to such
suspension or revocation.
(2) Any person who contravenes the provisions of sub section (1) shall
be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years, or
with fine which may extend to ¥ 1lakh or with both.

SECTION 74 : PUBLICATION FOR FRAUDULENT PURPOSE:

Whoever knowingly creates, publishes or otherwise makes available a
Electronic Signature Certificate for any fraudulent or unlawful purpose shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years or fine T
1 lakh or both.
SECTION 75 : ACT TO APPLY FOR OFFENCE OR CONTRAVENTION
COMMITTED OUTSIDE INDIA.
(1) Subject to provisions of sub section (2), the provisions of thiskct
shall apply also to any offence or contravention committed outside India by
any person irrespective of his nationality.
(2) For the purposes of sub section(1), this Act shall apply to an
offence or contravention committed outside India by a person if the act or
conduct constituting offence or contravention involves a computer, system,
network in India.
SECTION 76: CONFISCATION:
Any computer, computer system, floppies, compact disks, tape drivers
or any other accessory thereto, in respect of which any provisions of this Act,
rules, orders, or regulations made there under has been or is being
contravened, shall be liable to confiscation
Provided that if it is established to the satisfaction of the Court
adjudicating the confiscation that the person in whose possession, power or
control of any such computer etc. is found not responsible for the

Scanned with CamScanner

 )
CoNFIDENTIAL |NFoRmATION
Cnfdentd Informobin Conthotnbo Ha, €xQAU Of-
Boffuance dwelspment - From te onsfeachns /sposcteabing
Tectived fum T Cloenk/tadi pashnes<, 5 by algonitime
Cowotkas , vory poskopty
duelapedhen by of oAoftorce clovelbpmet
O an Code omofves Yy wat o5 Conjralenbed
I fuemabon . AL oy twis Onpemalin b Caluable & 20
Cropasity develspuy \'M‘Cmia ad wen vre Lo b e
@
Compelitors - TR % W0 Copy Y4t ta Rleay or Onfrewalin
Snth 0 acCocbingly oo 4 novonedy under f
(s
Copy Aot low for wnandtoned wie o Cnflenkal
or cafprnakan Sltoined, ivecty oc ordivecHy 'ova/aN pesa fun
anotner. A temedy will Sonie ® e /%\?ugfik L?muumf
BREAU OF TRUST'.
fur BREAM OF CONFIDENTALITY' o
T Akieg frar G b -6bkmined ‘oa,(x/gufi’ o Unjucken or

otkin Gun e fukin wndes Seckan 72 TA

AMWMN:ML
2000 o whith 2yems tupromaskad fne uph Alah
¢
upus s teoe
\NFOWNTION
PaoTECTWON OF ConeIpENTIAL
capprral egured oy-a pso
o dhes o i3 mh a hm:\a;two(fim

Scanned with CamScanner

Tt CoutreWi Teshonin g weopd 3y kA breath *WN‘\\
Tt o oo fl"‘} 'gWLjUf dovmt depesd ay “'MPUE.DCDNTM(J',
St dapords 00 “bwad Prinules of equily trak A Wiy By
Tt Unjrmakan 0 Confilone Ahall nob okt Wifuic ahtabay
Ok o L must nob makvee wse 0 b Gt prgjudia g fim,
Wby Gae b atiout Obfuinony &3 Gnieat
Noba ¢ ol nfrnbi
t o ailedg toak,
andero
B apo makter
Sipken frar praidt eaberpilt and fruefceo
o a fracke/ vk
Compekien W b (gt oyt
& 6bboin oy much Chfponabio ) gt Crtorhing e
Liffe « poseile
busnest gy At ks acy b letAom ko 2
Of 433 own -
by () Trode Secrdd @) Aweltod
LN N
Aty
() Disinen Sk@ pecdy
oy pduchin wot mm-bppflw
op an wnder kg o ()
a (@) Forantdl Shouckwyg
chok, or(©)
donike* in-howst” Snprvabin Like Salomyop
ar o fpon'c fling Fiplea . Son oy toaze
e offiuionty dovetuy.
o Roflly Conpientol nature, @ being Tobeakinlly
Sove i o g .
Bng b Congeifor Moptd b,oo vOAL oryardtadsn .
e unckhles
Ao aly Much urudd

Scanned with CamScanner

 96
Magistrate for offence under Section 8 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation
Act 1947,
The Supreme Court held Sea Customs Authority was not a “Court” and
adjudging of confiscation under the provisions of the Sea Customs Act, did
. not constitute a “Judgement” or “order” of a court. Hence, appellant is not to
get favour of Article 20(2).

5. Section 77 I.T. Act: will be valid if the confiscation etc. are done by
Controller, adjudicator or certifying authority etc. and later on the prosecution
can be launched in criminal courts for offence and prosecute him.

SECTION 77A : COMPOUNDING OF OFFENCE:

(1) A court of competent jurisdiction may compound offences, other
term
than offences for which the punishment is for lifg/6r imprisonment for a
exceeding 3years has been provided in this Act.
Provided that the Court shall not compound such offence where the
accused is, by reason of his previous, ymvicfions, liable to either enhanced
punishment o to punishment of different kind.

Provided further that the court shall not compound any offence where
has been
such offence affects the socio-economig-conditions of the country or
committed against a child below the age of 18 years or a woppan.
an
(2) The person accused of an offence under this Act may file
for trial
application for compounding in the court in which offence is pending
apply.
and provisions of sections 265 B and 265 C of Cr.P.C. shall
of
According to Section 320 Cr.P.C. a case relating to the “abetment
be compounded like
such offence or attempted to commit such offence” may
manner.
Section 265 B Cr.P.C.- Application for plea bargaining
disposition.
Section 265 C Cr.P.C.- Guidelines for mutually satisfactory

TO BE
SECTION 77 B: OFFENCES WITH 3 YEARS IMPRISONMENT
BAILABLE.
punishable
Not withstanding anything contained in Cr.P.C. the offence
and the offence
with imprisonment of 3 years and above shall be cognizable
punishable with imprisonment of 3 years shall be bailable.

SECTION 78 : POWER TO INVESTIGATE OFFENCES:

not
Not withstanding anything contained in Cr.P.C., a policeAct.officer
under this
below the rank of Dy.S.P. shall investigate any offence

Scanned with CamScanner

 95
contravention of the provisions of this Act, etc. the Court may instead of
making an order for confiscation of such computer etc., make such other
order authorized by this Act against the person contravening of the provisions
of this Act etc. if may think fit.
SECTION 28 of IT ACT 2000 the Controller shall take up investigation
any contravention of the provisions under the Act, Rules or regulation.
Action has been proposed against contravention of provisions of
ACT,RULES, and REGULATIONS in Sections 1(2), 19(3), 25(1), 28(1),
29(1), 43, 45, 46,63, 70 and 75 are some examples.
SECTION 77: COMPENSATION, PENALTIES OR CONFISCATION NOT TO
INTERFERE WITH OTHER PUNISHMENT:
No “compensation” awarded, “Penalty” imposed or “Confiscation” made
under this Act shall prevent the award of compensation, or imposition of other
penalty or punishment under any other law for the time being in force.

Constitutional Validity: _This section stands in conflict with Article 20(2) of

Constitution.
Double Jeopardy Principle recognized by Section 26 of General
clauses Act 1897, section 300 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.
1. Supreme Court held : “If there is no punishment for the offence a
result of prosecution sub section (2) of Article 20 has no application”.
2. There must be “prosecution” in both instances. Prosecution has both
wide and has no fixed definition. But as used in Art.20(2), it embodies the
following 3 essentials.
(i) There must be a person accused of an offence.
(i) The prosecution should have taken place before a Court or
Tribunal.
(iii) The proceedings should have been taken before the Judicial
Tribunal or Court in reference to the law which creates offences.

3. Raja Narayn Lal Bansilal Vrs M.P. Mistry

AIR 1961 SC 29 (38)
Justice Gajendra Gadkar observed:
“The constitutional right guaranteed by article 20(2) against double
jeopardy can be successfully invoked only where the prior proceedings on
which reliance is placed are of criminal nature instituted or continued before a
Court of Law or a tribunal in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the
statute which creates the offence, regulates the procedure”.

4. Magbool Hussain Vrs State of Bombay

AIR 1953 SC 325
The appellant did not declare at airport that he had brought in gold with
The
him. On search it was found he was carrying 107 tolas of gold with him.
Custom Authorities under Section 167 (8) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878
confiscated the gold. After this he was charged before Chief Presiding

Scanned with CamScanner