This Article has been written by Khushi Saxena of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad.
Introduction
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 is the substantive law in the criminal law which defines several common criminal offences such as murder, assault and theft to name a few. It was passed in the year 1860 and came into force in 1862.
The Information Technology Act, 2000 is the primary act in the country that deals with the provisions and punishments related to cybercrimes and electronic commerce.
Understanding Cybercrimes
Even though the word cybercrime has not been explicitly defined in the IT Act, it refers to a “criminal activity that either targets or uses a computer, a computer network or a networked device”[1]. Among the several types of cybercrimes, identity fraud, crypto jacking, theft and sale of corporate data, are a few.
Parallel Provisions in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & Information Technology Act,2000
There are several provisions under the two codes of laws which overlap with each other. Among the various provisions, a few of the are discussed below.
The provisions relating to hacking and date theft are laid down in the sections 43 and 66 of the IT Act. The aforementioned sections penalize several activities such as hacking, damaging computers, denying of access of a computer network, software or computer to a person that is authorized to access it, disruption of any computer setup, disrupting and damaging information stored in a processer, and many more. The upper limit prescribed penance for the aforementioned offences are limited to either imprisonment of up to the time period of three years or a compensation/ fine of rupees five lakhs or in extreme cases, both.
The offence of theft of movable property is dealt in the section 378 of the Indian Penal Code. Since section 22 of the IPC explicitly states that movable possessions refers to and included physical property of any kind, with land and material fixed to the earth being exceptions, “theft” of movable property here is applicable on the theft of any form of data, whether online or in hard form. The maximum prescribed punished for theft under the Indian Penal Code is identical to the punishment in the prior case i.e. either imprisonment of up to the time period of three years or a compensation or fine of rupees five lakhs or in certain cases, both.
When it comes to the receipt of stolen property, the penalty for receiving any stolen computer or a device that enables communication is mentioned in section 66B of the IT Act. The individual getting the stolen property would have to have done the task so dishonestly must have done so dishonestly or have cause to realize it was stolen possession, according to this provision. The punishment for the mentioned offence is imprisonment up to three years or a compensation/ exceeding to the maximum limit of one lakh rupees or in some cases, both.
Punishment for the procurement of stolen property is also mentioned in the section 411 of the Indian Penal Code. The written form of this is very similarly worded to the section 66B of the IT Act. The penalty too, prescribed under the Indian Penal Code is sentence with the upper limit being three years or a fine, or all these things together. The only significant distinction between the two sections is that in the punishment provided for the offence under the IT Act does not have an upper limit for the fine whereas the IPC does.
In matters of obscenity, the penalty for publishing or spreading via electronic means, any obscene material or material consisting of acts relating to sexual content or material comprising of children involved in sexual content the offences is provided for in the sections 67, 67A and 67B of the IT Act respectively. Under 67 the punishment on the first time of the commission of the offence is imprisonment for either three years paired with a compensation extending up to five lakh rupees. For the second time, the punishment changes to imprisonment up to five years and the amount of the fine being exceed to ten lakh rupees. In the sections 67A and 67B the punishment is sentence with the upper limit of the same being 5 years or a fine of rupees extending till ten lakhs.
Also applicable for the aforementioned offences under section 67, 67A and 67B are sections 292 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 292 provides that any individual that “sells, distributes, publicly exhibits or in any manner puts into circulation or has in his ownership any obscene book, pamphlet, paper, drawing, painting, representation or figure or any other obscene object whatsoever” will be bookable on a initial persuasion with confinement of either the term with the upper limit of the same being five years, and with fine which may range to two thousand rupees, in the event of another or succeeding conviction, with sentence of either description for a term which may extend to five years, to be supplemented by a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.
Section 294 of the IPC states that any individual that does any obscene act in a communal place, or is found singing, reciting, or uttering any obscene song, ballad, or words in or near a community place, to the annoyance of others, shall be penalized with sentence of either depiction for a term that may extend to three months, or with fine, or both.
Cyber Crimes not mentioned in the Indian Penal Code, 1860
With regards to cyber terrorism, section 66F of the IT Act endorses discipline for digital psychological oppression. Whoever, with expectation to undermine the solidarity, trustworthiness, security or power of India or to instigate or instill fear in individuals or any segment of individuals, denies or makes the forswearing of access any individual approved to get to a PC asset, or endeavors to infiltrate or get to a computer network asset without authorization or surpassing permitted admittance, or presents or causes the presentation of any cyber pollutant, and through such direct causes or is probably going to make passing or wounds people or harm to or annihilation of property or disturbs or realizing that it is probably going to cause harm or interruption of provisions or administrations vital for the existence of the local area or antagonistically influence basic data foundation, is blameworthy of 'digital psychological warfare'. Whoever purposely or deliberately infiltrates or gets to a asset without authorization or surpassing approved admittance, and through such direct gets admittance to data, information or data set that is confined for explanations behind the safekeeping of the State or unfamiliar relations, or any limited data, data or PC data set, with motivations to accept that such data, information or data set so acquired might be utilized to cause or liable to make injury the interests of the sway and respectability of India, the security of the State, well-disposed relationship with unfamiliar States, public request, conventionality or ethical quality, or according to hatred of court, criticism or prompting to an offense, or to the benefit of any outside country, gathering of people or something else, is additionally liable of 'digital illegal intimidation'.
[1] Gordon, S. and Ford, R., 2006. On the definition and classification of cybercrime. Journal in Computer Virology, 2(1), pp.13-20.
Comments