Information Technology Act, 2000: Difference between revisions

| imagesize = 150

| long_title = The Act to provide legal recognition for transactions carried out by means of electronic data interchange and other means of electronic communication, commonly referred to as "electronic commerce", which involve the use of alternatives to paper-based methods of communication and storage of information, to nusta editing electronic filing of documents with the Government agencies and further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and favour

| amendments = [http://www.meity.gov.in/content/information-technology-act-2000  IT (Amendment) Act 2008]

[[Primary and secondary legislation|Secondary or subordinate legislation]] to the IT Act includes the Intermediary Guidelines Rules 2011 and the [[Information Technology Rules, 2021|Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021]]'''.'''..

The bill was passed in the budget session of 2000 and signed by President [[K. R. Narayanan]] on 9 June 2000. The bill was finalised  by a group of officials headed by then [[Ministry of Communications and Information Technology|Minister of Information Technology]] [[Pramod Mahajan]].<ref name=ComeIntoForce>{{cite news|title=IT Act to come into force from August 15|url=http://www.rediff.com/business/2000/aug/09itact.htm|access-date=14 April 2015|work=[[Rediff]]|date=9 August 2000}}</ref>

The original Act contained 94 sections, divided into 13 chapters and 4 [[schedule]]s. The laws apply to the whole of India. If a crime involves a computer or network located in India, persons of other nationalities can also be indicted under the law, .<ref name="PawarKolekar2015">{{cite book|author1=Sujata Pawar|author2=Yogesh Kolekar|title=Essentials of Information Technology Law|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=m6mjBwAAQBAJ&pg=PT296|access-date=14 April 2015|date=23 March 2015|publisher=Notion Press|isbn=978-93-84878-57-3|pages=296–306}}</ref>

A major amendment was made in 2008. It introduced Section 66A which penalized sending "offensive messages". It also introduced Section 69, which gave authorities the power of "interception or monitoring or decryption of any information through any computer resource". Additionally, it introduced provisions addressing - [[pornography]], [[child porn]], [[cyber terrorism]] and [[voyeurism]]. The amendment was passed on 22 December 2008 without any debate in Lok Sabha. The next day it was passed by the Rajya Sabha. It was signed into law by President [[Pratibha Patil]], on 5 February 2009.<ref name=Sec66A>{{cite web|title=Section 66A of the Information Technology Act|url=http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/section-66A-information-technology-act|publisher=[[Centre for Internet and Society (India)]]|access-date=14 April 2015}}</ref><ref name=Snooping>{{cite news|title=Yes, snooping’s allowed|url=http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/yes-snooping-s-allowed/419978/0|access-date=14 April 2015|work=[[The Indian Express]]|date=6 February 2009}}</ref><ref name=DeafDumb>{{cite news|title=Deaf, Dumb & Dangerous - 21 Minutes: That was the time our MPs spent on Section 66A. How they played|url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1150326/jsp/frontpage/story_10924.jsp#.VRTZco6upng|access-date=6 May 2015|work=[[The Telegraph (India)]]|date=26 March 2015}}</ref><ref name=AmendedCyberCrime>{{cite news|title=Amended IT Act to prevent cyber crime comes into effect|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/amended-it-act-to-prevent-cyber-crime-comes-into-effect/article39398.ece|access-date=8 May 2015|work=[[The Hindu]]|date=27 October 2015}} Vishal rintu -journalists of the new era</ref>

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|200,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|500,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|200,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to five years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|1,000,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to seven years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|1,000,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to 2 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

| Imprisonment up to 2 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

|Imprisonment up to 2 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

|Imprisonment up to 3 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|500,000|INR}}

|Imprisonment up to 2 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

|74466

|Imprisonment up to 2 years, or/and with fine up to {{currency|100,000|INR}}

* In February 2001, in one of the first cases, the Delhi police arrested two men running a [[web-hosting]] company. The company had shut down a website over non-payment of dues. The owner of the site had claimed that he had already paid and complained to the police. The Delhi police had charged the men for hacking under Section 66 of the IT Act and breach of trust under Section 408 of the [[Indian Penal Code]]. The two men had to spend 6 days in [[Tihar jail]] waiting for bail.  

* On 24 November 2020, another 43 Chinese mobile apps were banned supported by the same reasoning, most notably [[AliExpress]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Government of India blocks 43 mobile apps from accessing by users in India|url=http://www.pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1675335|access-date=2020-11-24|website=www.pib.gov.in}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-11-24|title=Indian government bans 43 apps: Here’s the list|url=https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/indian-government-bans-43-apps-here-s-the-list-71606218186438.html|access-date=2020-11-24|website=Hindustan Times Tech|language=en}}</ref>

On 24 March 2015, the Supreme Court of India, gave the verdict that Section 66A is unconstitutional in entirety. The court said that Section 66A of IT Act 2000 is "arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free speech" provided under [[Fundamental rights in India|Article 19(1)]] of the [[Constitution of India]]. But the Court turned down a plea to strike down sections 69A and 79 of the Act, which deal with the procedure and safeguards for blocking certain websites.<ref name=Draconian>{{cite news|title=SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-66-a-of-the-it-act-finds-it-unconstitutional/article7027375.ece|access-date=23 April 2015|work=[[The Hindu]]|date=25 March 2015}}</ref><ref name=KeyPoints>{{cite news|title=SC quashes Section 66A of IT Act: Key points of court verdict|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-quashes-Section66A-IT-Act/listshow/46673677.cms|access-date=6 May 2015|work=[[The Times of India]]|date=24 March 2015}}</ref>

The [[data privacy]] rules introduced in the Act in 2011 have been described as too strict by some Indian and US firms. The rules require firms to obtain written permission from customers before collecting and using their personal data. This has affected US firms which outsource to Indian companies. However, some companies have welcomed the strict rules, saying it will remove fears of outsourcing to Indian companies.<ref name=StrictData>{{cite news|title=India data privacy rules may be too strict for some U.S. companies|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/india-data-privacy-rules-may-be-too-strict-for-some-us-companies/2011/05/18/AF9QJc8G_story.html|access-date=23 April 2015|work=[[The Washington Post]]|date=21 May 2011}}</ref>

The Section 69 allows intercepting any information and ask for information decryption. To refuse decryption is an offence. The [[Indian Telegraph Act, 1885]] allows the government to tap phones. But, according to a 1996 Supreme Court verdict the government can tap phones only in case of a "public emergency". But, there is no such restriction on Section 69.<ref name=Snooping/> On 20 December 2018, the [[Ministry of Home Affairs (India)|Ministry of Home Affairs]] cited Section 69 in the issue of an order authorising ten central agencies to intercept, monitor, and decrypt “any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer.” <ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/all-computers-can-now-be-monitored-by-govt-agencies/article25792523.ece|title=All computers can now be monitored by govt. agencies|date=2018-12-21|work=The Hindu|access-date=2018-12-27|others=Special Correspondent|language=en-IN|issn=0971-751X}}</ref> While some claim this to be a violation of the fundamental [[right to privacy]], the Ministry of Home Affairs has claimed its validity on the grounds of national security.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/toi-editorials/a-spy-state-home-ministrys-blanket-surveillance-order-must-be-tested-against-fundamental-right-to-privacy/|title=A spy state? Home ministry’s blanket surveillance order must be tested against fundamental right to privacy|date=2018-12-24|website=Times of India Blog|language=en-US|access-date=2018-12-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/government-s-surveillance-order-key-to-national-security-mha-officials/story-4gNFGn0hyUuz0XrEDuq9NJ.html|title=Government’s surveillance order key to national security: MHA officials|date=2018-12-27|website=Hindustan Times|language=en|access-date=2018-12-27}}</ref>

* {{cite news|author1=David Rizk|title=New Indian Internet Intermediary Regulations Pose Serious Threats to Net Users’ Freedom of Expression|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/new-indian-internet-intermediary-regulations-pose|work=[[Electronic Frontier Foundation]]|date=10 June 2011}}

[[Category:2000 in India]]

[[Category:2000 in law]]

[[Category:2008 in India]]

[[Category:2008 in law]]