INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LAW

PROJECT
ON
CONTRAVENTIONS UNDER INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000

SUBMITTED TO – SUBMITTED BY –

Dr.Amita Verma Shivika Sood

UILS, Panjab University 165/15

Chandigarh Section - C
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This project would be incomplete without expressing my gratitude towards the people
who made it possible for me to finish it on time and with accuracy.
Firstly, I would like to thank our Information Technology Law Professor Dr.Amita
Verma for giving me the requisite guidelines and helping me in fulfilling the loopholes of my
project.
Secondly, I would like to thank my family member‘s friends who constantly gave me
advice on the quality of information and helped me in completing my project.
Lastly I would like to thank our library staff for helping me in collecting the material and
the required books for the project.

Shivika Sood

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 2

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................................................4

TABLE OF CASES.........................................................................................................................5

TAMPERING WITH COMPUTER SOURCE DOCUMENTS.....................................................6

HACKING.......................................................................................................................................9

PUNISHMENT FOR SENDING OFFENSIVE MESSAGES THROUGH COMMUNICATION

SERVICE,......................................................................................................................................12

PUNISHMENT FOR DISHONESTLY RECEIVING STOLEN COMPUTER RESOURCE OR

COMMUNICATION DEVICE.....................................................................................................13

PUNISHMENT FOR IDENTITY THEFT....................................................................................14

PUNISHMENT FOR CHEATING BY PERSONATION BY USING COMPUTER RESOURCE

.......................................................................................................................................................15

PUNISHMENT FOR VIOLATION OF PRIVACY.....................................................................16

PUNISHMENT FOR CYBER TERRORISM...............................................................................17

PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OBSCENE MATERIAL IN

ELECTRONIC FORM..................................................................................................................18

PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OF MATERIAL CONTAINING

SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ACT......................................................................................................19

PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OF MATERIAL DEPICTING

CHILDREN IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ACT IN ELECTRONIC FORM.................................20

PRESERVATION AND RETENTION OF INFORMATION BY INTERMEDIARIES............21

BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................22

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 3

 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS`

SC – Supreme Court

SCC – Supreme Court Cases

IT – Information Technology

ILR – Indian Law Reporter

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 4

 TABLE OF CASES

Dr. Katari Sunil Kumar v. Dr. B. Hema Nalini and Another, 2013(1)ALD(Cri)251,
2013(1)ALT(Cri)257.................................................................................................................11
Rajesh v. State of Kerala, 2014CriLJ204, ILR2013(4)Kerala443................................................11
Sanjay Kumar v. State Of Haryana , CRR No.66 of 2013 (O&M).................................................7
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.167 OF 2012...............12
Sporting Mindz Technology Private Limited v. State of Karnataka and Ors., 2015(1) AKR 23..13
Syed Asifuddin and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.,2005 CriLJ 4314 (AP)..................7

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 5

 TAMPERING WITH COMPUTER SOURCE DOCUMENTS

INTRODUCTION –
According to section 65 of the IT Act 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 punishable with imprisonment up to three years, or with fine which may extend up
to two lac rupees, or with both.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, "computer source code" means the listing of
programmes, computer commands, design and layout and programme analysis of computer
resource in any form.

COMPUTER SOURCE –
Computer source code is the listing of programmes, computer commands, design and layout and
programme analysis of computer resource in any form. Computer source code need not only be
in the electronic form. It can be printed on paper (e.g. printouts of flowcharts for designing a
software application). This section relates to computer source code that is either:
 Required to be kept (e.g. in a cell phone, hard disk, server etc), or
 Required to be maintained by law,

INGREDIENTS –
The following acts are prohibited in respect of the source code:-
 Knowingly concealing or destroying or altering;
 Intentionally concealing or destroying or altering;
 Knowingly causing another to conceal or destroy or alter;
 Intentionally causing another to conceal or destroy or alter

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 6

Where there is Concealment which simply means “to hide” or Destroys which means “to make
useless”, “cause to cease to exist”, “nullify”, “to demolish”, or “reduce to nothing”. Destroys
means “to make useless”, “cause to cease to exist”, “nullify”, “to demolish”, or “reduce to
nothing”. Where there is Alteration in relation to source code which means “modifies”,
“changes”, “makes different” etc. This modification or change could be in respect to size,
properties, format, value, utility etc”.
The Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Syed Asifuddin and Ors. v.
State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.1 Where Reliance Infocomm launched a scheme under which a
cell phone subscriber was given a digital handset worth Rs. 10,500 as well as service bundle for
3 years with an initial payment of Rs. 3350 and monthly outflow of Rs. 600. The subscriber was
also provided a 1 year warranty and 3 year insurance on the handset. The condition was that the
handset was technologically locked so that it would only work with the Reliance Infocomm
services. If the customer wanted to leave Reliance services, he would have to pay some charges
including the true price of the handset. Since the handset was of a high quality, the market
response to the scheme was phenomenal. Unidentified persons contacted Reliance customers
with an offer to change to a lower priced Tata Indicom scheme. As part of the deal, their phone
would be technologically “unlocked” so that the exclusive Reliance handsets could be used for
the Tata Indicom service. Reliance officials came to know about this “unlocking” by Tata
employees and lodged a First Information Report (FIR) under various provisions of the Indian
Penal Code, Information Technology Act and the Copyright Act. The Hon’ble High Court held
that a cell phone is a computer as envisaged under the Information Technology Act. The
Electronic Serial Number (ESN) is a unique 32-bit number programmed into the phone when it
is manufactured by the instrument manufacturer and System Identification Code(SID) is a unique
5-digit number that is assigned to each carrier by the licensor which come within the definition
of “computer source code” under section 65 of the Information Technology Act. When ESN is
altered, the offence under Section 65 of Information Technology Act is attracted because every
service provider has to maintain its own SID code and also give a customer specific number to
each instrument used to avail the services provided.
In the case of Sanjay Kumar v. State Of Haryana2 where the Manager, Vijay Bank, NIT,
Faridabad moved a complaint dated 11.02.2003 before the Police stating that the petitioner was
1
Syed Asifuddin and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.,2005 CriLJ 4314 (AP).
2
Sanjay Kumar v. State Of Haryana , CRR No.66 of 2013 (O&M).

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 7

deputed by M/s Virmati Software and Telecommunication Ltd. to maintain the Software System
supplied by them to the bank. He was also looking Software System of certain other banks. In
connection with rendering such services, the petitioner was having access to their accounting
system which was computerized and was also in a position to enter into ledgers and various other
accounts. While reconciling the accounts, certain discrepancies were pointed out by the officials
of the bank and in that process, it was revealed that the accused-petitioner, who was having SB
Account No. 21499 in his CRR No.66 of 2013 (O&M) 3 personal name in their bank,
manipulated the entries by forging and fabricating certain entries from one account to another,
from the computer system by handling the software and got the entries pertaining to the amount
of the bank and withdrew the amounts from the bank on various dates by issuing cheques in his
own favour and withdrew the amount from the cash counter of the bank as well as through
transfer/clearing transactions. As per enquiry, it has been revealed that the accused by carrying
out forgery, fabricating the entries in the computer system of the bank, illegally and wrongfully,
withdrew Rs.17,67,409/- from the bank and thus, caused wrongful gain to himself and wrongful
loss to the bank. The said Bank came to know regarding the fraud committed by the accused on
07.02.2003. thereafter, the accused was called to the bank and he was confronted with the details
of the fraud but he gave evasive replies as only admitted having embezzled a sum of Rs. 17 lacs
without giving further information or revealing the exact amount of fraud or the modus operandi
of the same and also assured to pay back the amount to the bank. On receipt of the complaint, a
case bearing FIR No. 165 dated 11.02.2003, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 65, 66 and 72 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000 was
registered against the petitioner. It was held by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana
that the accused has tampered with the computer source document and he has also altered in the
information which resided in the computer resource and by doing so he committed the offences
under Sections 65 and 66 of the Information & Technology Act, 2000. At the same time, it is
pertinent to mention that although accused was having secured assess to electrical record of the
bank and he forged the entries and cheated to cause wrongful gain to himself but there is no such
breach of confidentiality by disclosing the information to any other person and as such he is
acquitted of offence under Section 72 of the Information & Technology Act, 2000.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 8

 HACKING

INTRODUCTION –
(1)Whoever with the intent to cause or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or
damage to the public or any person destroys or deletes or alters any information residing in a
computer resource or diminishes its value or utility or affects it injuriously by any means,
commits hacking.
(2)Whoever commits hacking shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years, or with
fine which may extend upto two lac rupees, or with both.

INGREDIENTS –
 Intention to cause wrongful loss or damage or Knowledge of the likelihood of wrongful loss
or damage;
AND
 Destruction or deletion or alteration of information in a computer or diminishing value or
utility of a computer resource or injuriously affecting a computer resource.
Loss signifies detriment or disadvantage. Loss can be temporary or permanent. Loss can relate to
something that the loser has currently or is likely to get in the future. This term is best
understood through the following illustrations. Wrongful loss is the loss by unlawful means.
Damage for the purposes of this section implies injury or deterioration caused by an unlawful
act. Intent means a fixed determination to act in a particular manner. To cause means to make
something happen. Cause can be direct or indirect. Knowingly doing something implies
consciously or wilfully doing something. Likely to cause means probable to cause. The term
likely is usually used to mean “in all probability”. This term has to be interpreted in light of the
circumstances of each case. Public is a term that refers to “the people”, “the general body of
mankind”, “the community at large”, “a class of the community” etc. A thing is said to be public
if it is owned by the public or if its uses are public. Person includes natural persons (such as men,
women and children) as well as artificial persons (such as companies, societies etc). Information
includes data, text, images, sound, voice, codes, computer programmes, software and data bases
or micro film or computer generated micro fiche. Computer resource includes computer,

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 9

computer system, computer network, data, computer data base or software. Information residing
in a computer resource must be construed in a wide manner. It includes information that exists or
is present in a computer resource temporarily or permanently. This is best discussed through the
following illustrations. Destroys means “to make useless”, “cause to cease to exist”, “nullify”,
“to demolish”, or “reduce to nothing”. Destroying information also includes acts that render the
information useless for the purpose for which it had been created.
Deletes in relation to electronic information means “to remove”, “to erase”, “to make invisible”
etc. Such deletion can be temporary or permanent.
Alters, in relation to electronic information, means “modifies”, “changes”, “makes different” etc.
This modification or change could be in respect to size, properties, format, value, utility etc”.
Alteration can be permanent or temporary. It can also be reversible or irreversible. Value implies
monetary worth.
Utility means “usefulness”.
Diminish means “reduce” or “lessen”. Diminishes value means “reduces the monetary worth”.
Affects means “influences” or “produces a change in”. Affects injuriously means produces a
“harmful or detrimental change”.
It is pertinent to note that the allegation is that the project proposal of one V.K. Ibrahim
was rejected on various reasons. But at the same time, the credit limit enjoyed by K.C. Wood
Industries has been increased from 25 lacs to 50 lacs. It is also alleged that the same is an undue
personal favour done by the Regional Manager. The communication for the favour was made by
the E-mail address. It is to be noted that no kind of undue pecuniary benefit, ill-will, ulterior
motive or mala fides had been attributed against the said Regional Manager. In short, the
allegation is that the attitude shown by the Regional Manager was discriminatory or, at the most,
he has violated the norms or showed some undue favour. The allegation is thus confined to an act
done in discharge of the official duty and nothing more than that. More pertinently, the message
was intended to make an enquiry on his complaint as obviously the same is the concluding
request. I am of the opinion that the message can be depicted as a complaint and if the allegation
is not true, it is only a false complaint. It is to be noted that C.W. 6 Job Abraham, the Asst.
Manager, Vigilance Wing as well as the recipient of the message had given a statement that no
independent vigilance enquiry had been conducted so far by the Vigilance Department of the
State Bank of Travancore, as he believed the statement of Branch Manager and Zonal Manager,

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 10

despite the receipt of this message indicating discrimination in granting loan. I am of the opinion
that the message does not disclose an intent to harm the reputation of the Bank or C.W. 1, the
essential ingredient constituting the offence under Sec. 469 of Indian Penal Code; but intended
for embarking an enquiry.3
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the Dr. Katari Sunil Kumar v. Dr. B. Hema Nalini
and Another4 that the respondent is known to the petitioner since they had studied together at
plus one level and even thereafter at Chandigarh. Her further allegation is that in December 2012
the petitioner sent her a friend request on the face book, which she accepted since the petitioner
had been her classmate. She continued chatting with the petitioner on the face book and
maintained contact with the petitioner, who finally proposed to her in March 2013, which
proposal was turn down by the prosecutor. It is thereafter that the petitioner started pressuring the
prosecutor for marriage. It is only then that prosecutor learnt that petitioner belongs to a different
caste and she finally refused to marry the petitioner. It is only then alleged that in order to take
revenge the petitioner sent a SMS to the brother of the prosecutor wherein a nude photo of the
prosecutor was sent by morphing.

3
Rajesh v. State of Kerala, 2014CriLJ204, ILR2013(4)Kerala443.
4
Dr. Katari Sunil Kumar v. Dr. B. Hema Nalini and Another, 2013(1)ALD(Cri)251, 2013(1)ALT(Cri)257.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 11

 PUNISHMENT FOR SENDING OFFENSIVE MESSAGES
THROUGH COMMUNICATION SERVICE

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 66A that “any person who sends, by means of a computer
resource or a communication device:-
a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or
b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance,
inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill
will, persistently makes 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 deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such
messages shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two three years
and with fine.”
For explanation the purposes 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 attachments in text,
image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message.

REPEALED –
That the Hon’ble Supreme Court has struck down the Section 66A of the Information
Technology Act, 2000 is struck down in its entirety being violative of Article 19(1)(a) and not
saved under Article 19(2).5

5
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.167 OF 2012.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 12

 PUNISHMENT FOR DISHONESTLY RECEIVING STOLEN
COMPUTER RESOURCE OR COMMUNICATION DEVICE

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 66B of the Act that “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 three years or with fine which
may extend to rupees one lakh or with both.”

INGREDIENTS –
That the ingredients are as follows:-
 Dishonestly receives or retains;
 Computer resource;
 reason to believe to be stolen
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the second
respondent for seizure of passport along with all the equipment, data, computers, software
programmes, compact discs (CDs.), drives, hardware and all forms of data storage and transfer in
the possession of respondent No. 3 in connection with Crime No. 37/2014 on the file of Cyber
Crime Police Station, Palace Road, Bangalore. It is an undisputed fact that petitioner has filed a
complaint before the Cyber Crime Police Station, Sub-Division CID, CID Annexe Building,
Carlton House, Palace Road, Bangalore on 23.9.2014 and the police have registered the said case
in Crime No. 37/2014 for the offence punishable under Sections 43(j), 65, 66(B) of the IT Act
and started the investigation. It is contended that the investigating officer has not made any
efforts for seizure of the articles which are very important so far as this case is concerned. It was
held by the Hon’ble Court that the authorities are directed to apply their mind.6

6
Sporting Mindz Technology Private Limited v. State of Karnataka and Ors., 2015(1) AKR 23.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 13

 PUNISHMENT FOR IDENTITY THEFT

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 66C that “ 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 Imprisonment Of Either Description For A Term Which May
Extend To Three Years And Shall Also Be Liable To Fine Which May Extend To Rupees One
Lac.”

INGREDIENTS –
That the ingredients are as follows:-
 Fraudulently or dishonestly;
 makes use of any electronic form.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 14

PUNISHMENT FOR CHEATING BY PERSONATION BY USING
COMPUTER RESOURCE

INTRODUCTION -
It has been stated under Section 66D that “Whoever, by means of any communication device or
computer resource cheats by personation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may
extend to one lakh rupees.”

INGREDIENTS –
That the ingredients of Section 66D are as follows:-
 Personation by any communication device; or
 computer resource;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 15

 PUNISHMENT FOR VIOLATION OF PRIVACY

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 66E that “Whoever, intentionally or knowingly captures,
publishes or transmits the image of a private area of any person without his or her consent, under
circumstances violating the privacy of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment which
may extend to three years or with fine not exceeding two lac rupees, or with both.”

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredients of this Section are as follows:-
 Intentionally or Knowingly;
 captures, publishes or transmits the image of a private area of any person;
 without consent.

EXPLANATION –
For the purpose of this Section here “transmit” means to electronically send a visual image with
the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons. The word “capture”, with respect to an image,
means to videotape, photograph, film or record by any means. The “private area” means the
naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast. The circumstances
violating privacy are as follows:-
 he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image of his private area
was being captured; or
 any part of his or her private area would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether
that person is in a public or private place.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 16

 PUNISHMENT FOR CYBER TERRORISM

INTRODUCTION -
It has been stated under Section 66F where the punishment for cyber terrorism has been defined
as:- “
(1) Whoever,
(a) with intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of India or to strike terror in
the people or any section of the people by –
(i) denying or cause the denial of access to any person authorized to access computer resource; or
(ii) attempting to penetrate or access a computer resource without authorization or exceeding
authorized access; or
(iii) introducing or causing to introduce any Computer Contaminant. and by means of such
conduct causes or is likely to cause death or injuries to persons or damage to or destruction of
property or disrupts or knowing that it is likely to cause damage or disruption of supplies or
services essential to the life of the community or adversely affect the critical information
infrastructure specified under section 70, or
(b) knowingly or intentionally penetrates or accesses a computer resource without authorisation
or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct obtains access to information,
data or computer database that is restricted for reasons of the security of the State or foreign
relations; or any restricted information, data or computer database, with reasons to believe that
such information, data or computer database so obtained may be used to cause or likely to cause
injury to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly
relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of
court, defamation or incitement to an offence, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, group of
individuals or otherwise, commits the offence of cyber terrorism. (2) Whoever commits or
conspires to commit cyber terrorism shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to
imprisonment for life’.”

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 17

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredients are as follows:-
 Intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of India or to strike terror in the
people or any section of the people;
 Denying or cause the denial of access to any person authorized to access computer resource;
or;
 Attempting to penetrate or access a computer resource without authorisation or exceeding
authorized access; or
 Introducing or causing to introduce any Computer Contaminant. and by means of such
conduct causes or is likely to cause death or injuries to persons or damage to or destruction of
property or disrupts or knowing that it is likely to cause damage or disruption of supplies or
services essential to the life of the community or adversely affect the critical information
infrastructure specified under section 70; or
 Knowingly or intentionally penetrates or accesses a computer resource without authorisation
or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct obtains access to information,
data or computer database that is restricted for reasons of the security of the State or foreign
relations; or any restricted information, data or computer database, with reasons to believe
that such information, data or computer database so obtained may be used to cause or likely
to cause injury to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the
State.

TERRORISM AND CYBER SPACE –

The deadly combination of terrorism & information technology has given birth to new term
Cyber terrorism. Before we discuss the possibilities & potential of cyber-terrorism, we must first
look at some acceptable definitions of the term. The word cyber-terrorism refers to two elements:
cyberspace and terrorism. Some of the definitions of cyber-terrorism are as follows:
 Cyber-terrorism is a criminal act perpetrated by the use of computers and
telecommunications capabilities, resulting in violence, destruction and/or disruption of
services to create fear by causing confusion and uncertainty within a given population, with

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 18

 the goal of influencing a government or population to conform to a particular political, social,
or ideological agenda.7
 Cyber-terrorism is any premeditated, politically motivated attack against information,
computer systems, computer programs, and data which results in violence against non-
combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents.8
 Cyber-terrorism is the convergence of cyberspace and terrorism. It refers to unlawful attacks
and threats of attack against computers, networks, and the information stored therein when
done to intimidate or coerce a government or its people in furtherance of political or social
objectives. Further, to qualify as cyber-terrorism, an attack should result in violence against
persons or property, or at least cause enough harm to generate fear. Attacks that lead to death
or bodily injury, explosions, or severe economic loss would be examples. Serious attacks
against critical infrastructures could be acts of cyber-terrorism, depending on their impact.
Attacks that disrupt nonessential services or that are mainly a costly nuisance would not.9
While the definition of cyber terrorism at 1 specifies that computer systems or
telecommunication capabilities are used to conduct cyber terrorist attacks. However, the
definition given by FBI at 2 only specifies that computer and information systems are the targets
of cyber terrorist attacks. Arguably both elements should apply i.e. it may be used as a tool or
target or both.
While an information system can be attacked in any number of ways using host of conventional
methods like bombing, arson, etc, however for an act to be classed as cyber-terrorism, the
attacker must use information systems, technology, computer or other electronic means to launch
the attack.
Cyber terrorism is one of various forms of cyber attack. Often the terms cyber-terrorism and
cyber attack are used interchangeably by layman but actually they differ in that every cyber
terrorism is a cyber attack but not vice versa. The definition given by Professor Dorothy E.
Denning (Professor of computer science at Georgetown University) at 3 is a comprehensive
definition which demonstrates that for cyber-terrorism to be perpetrated there are at least three
elements which must be satisfied in order to distinguish a cyber terrorist attack from an ordinary

7
Proposed by the National Infrastructure Protection Center, Analysis and Information Sharing Unit, USA.
8
US Federal Bureau of Investigation.
9
Denning, D. (2000), Cyberterrorism, 
http://www.cs.georgetown.edu/~denning/infosec/cyberterror-GD.doc).

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 19

cyber attack. Denning points out that politically motivated cyber attacks that lead to death or
bodily injury, explosions, or severe economic loss would be examples of cyber-terrorism.
Serious attacks against critical infrastructures could be acts of cyber-terrorism, depending on
their impact. Attacks that disrupt non-essential services or that are mainly a costly nuisance
would not be covered under cyber terrorism.

WHETHER ANCILLARY CYBER ACTIVITIES TO FURTHER TERRORISM

SHOULD BE POSITED AS CYBER TERRORISM –
The aforesaid definitions suggests that the use of the internet in an ancillary role in furtherance of
terrorism (ancillary cyber activities) for example; terrorist use of information technology to
formulate plans, spread propaganda, support terrorist recruiting, raise funds, and communicate is
not regarded as cyber terrorism. It is only when the destructive nature of the act itself is carried
out via computers or other cyber/electronic means through techniques such as infected e-mail
attachments. Delivery of the terrorists message via the Internet does not constitute cyber
terrorism. This restricted interpretation of the term Cyber Terrorism is further supported by
Professor Gabriel Weimann, who suggests that Cyber terrorism means only the use of computer
network tools to harm or shut down critical national infrastructures (such as energy,
transportation, government operations). However, if we take the strict interpretation of the word
cyber terrorism, then the terrorist use of computers as a facilitator of their activities, whether for
propaganda, recruitment or even for mounting physical terrorist strike would not simply be
Cyber terrorism. In other words, would the law deal with only core mischief for instance
physical terrorist strike but what about the use of computer or information technology by terrorist
which facilitated that strike? Lets take for instance, the master mind of terrorists to carry out
covert terrorist operations sends information about possible targets, plans or other operational
information via e-mail in encrypted format to the terrorists and the terrorists intercept the
encrypted message and on its basis carry out operation of the magnitude we recently witnessed at
Mumbai. Would the said use of Information technology to facilitate the horrendous terrorist
strike with precision and impunity be an act of Cyber Terrorism or not, if we go by what has
been suggested by Professor Dorothy E. Denning & Professor Gabriel Weimannit? Would it be
an acceptable proposition in the Indian subcontinent given the current peculiar geopolitical
situation? By grace of god, we have not yet witnessed anywhere in the world (except in

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 20

Hollywood movie), two large aircraft collide due to breach or hacking of air traffic control
system by terrorists. But in realty we do have witnessed terrorist strikes resulting in loss of huge
precious human lives & destruction of property where during investigation; it has been found
that information technology one way or the other has played an ancillary but pivotal role to the
terrorist attack. Therefore, with due respect to above experts, it is the view of this author that
such ancillary use of computer which facilitate (though indirectly) the terrorist acts of the gravity
and magnitude similar to recent Mumbai strike should come under the purview of Cyber
terrorism.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 21

 PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING
OBSCENE MATERIAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 67 which provides Punishment for publishing or transmitting
obscene material in electronic form:- “Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published
in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its
effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all
relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be
punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to two three years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in the event of
a second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.”

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredients of the Section are as follows:-
 Publishes or transmits or causes to be published;
 in electronic form;
 material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest.

OBSCENITY –
In Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal10, the Supreme Court has held that a photograph of Boris
Becker and his fiancee, in the nude, is not “obscene” within the meaning of S. 292 of the Indian
Penal Code. This judgment is particularly significant because it expressly rejects the Hicklin
Test, the archaic 1868 rule for determining obscenity, that the Court has regularly used in its
history – most notably, to uphold the ban on Lady Chatterly’s Lover in Ranjit Udeshi’s
Case.  Interestingly, by citing a number of countries where Lady Chatterly’s Lover was not found
obscene, the Court seems – at least implicitly – to be expressing its disapproval of Udeshi,
10
Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal, (2014) 4 SCC 257.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 22

almost fifty years after it was decided. In contrast to the Hicklin Test, which was focused on
individual or isolated aspects of an entire work that could be deemed obscene, as well as its
impact on “vulnerable” sections of society, the Court adopts what it called the “community
standards” test:
“A picture of a nude/seminude woman, as such, cannot per se be called obscene unless it has
the tendency to arouse feeling or revealing an overt sexual desire. The picture should be
suggestive of deprave mind  (sic)  and designed to excite sexual passion in persons who are likely
to see it, which will depend on the  particular posture and the background in which
the  nude/semi-nude woman is depicted. Only those sex-related materials which have a tendency
of “exciting lustful thoughts” can be held to be obscene, but the obscenity has  to be judged from
the point of view of an average person, by applying contemporary community
standards.”  (Paragraph 24)
The Supreme Court gets rid of the Hicklin Test at last, the judgment is also problematic in many
respects. First, the Court cites the 1957 US Supreme Court case of  Roth v. United States, and its
use of the phrase “contemporary community standards” has been lifted from Roth – but the test
in Roth  itself was superseded twice over – first in 1966, by Memoirs v. Massachusetts, and
then in 1973, by Miller v. California, neither of which are cited by the Court.
However, Roth did not just speak about community standards test, but actually laid down a
three-pronged test. Community standards constituted the first prong, but under the second prong,
the material had to be “patently offensive”, and under the third prong, “of no redeeming social
value” (Memoirs and Miller saw a liberalization of the third prong). The second and third parts
of the Roth test are conspicuously absence from the Court’s judgment – in essence, it seems to be
saying that if (on applying community standards), a particular work “has a tendency to arouse
feeling or reveal an overt sexual desire“, it can be criminalized as obscene. On what ground does
the Court hold sexual arousal to be something that ought to be criminalised? Additionally, the
last Roth ground is crucial, because it is on the social value prong that works of art, literature,
sculpture etc., that would otherwise be deemed obscene, are spared. The Court has referred to
social value elsewhere, notably in Udeshi itself, and so its absence in this judgment, that
otherwise rejects the foundation of Udeshi, leaves the law of obscenity in a state of flux.
The Court also cites the Canadian case of R v. Butler in its support for the community standards
test. In Butler’s case it  restricted itself to outlawing “undue exploitation of sex”, which in turn it

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 23

defined as either sex with violence, or that was “degrading or dehumanizing”. Unlike in the US,
while Butler made community standards relevant in its obscenity enquiry, it did not make
them dispositive. This, naturally, is extremely important, because in determining “community
standards”, time and time again we have seen that the Courts simply adopt the dominant
majority’s publicly affirmed views, and thus a fortiori exclude alternative, marginalized and
minority ways of thinking, especially about sexual matters. Butler tries to provide at least some
protection against this tyranny of the majority.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 24

 PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OF
MATERIAL CONTAINING SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ACT

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 67A the Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material
containing sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form – “Whoever publishes or transmits or
causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which contains sexually
explicit act or conduct shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to ten lac
rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to
ten lac rupees.”
Whereas the Exception provided as follows this section and section 67 does not extend to
any book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation or figure in electronic
form- (i) the publication of which is proved to be justified as being for the public good on the
ground that such book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation or figure is in
the interest of science, literature, art,or learning or other objects of general concern; or (ii) which
is kept or used bona fide for religious purposes.

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredients of Section 67A are as follows:-
 Publishes or Transmits;
 Causes to be published or transmitted in electronic form;
 Any sexually explicit act or conduct.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 25

 PUNISHMENT FOR PUBLISHING OR TRANSMITTING OF
MATERIAL DEPICTING CHILDREN IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT
ACT IN ELECTRONIC FORM

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 67B the Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material
depicting children in sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form. Whoever,
(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 or,
(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 or,
(c) cultivates, entices or induces children to online relationship with one or more children for and
on sexually explicit act or in a manner that may offend a reasonable adult on the computer
resource or ,
(d) facilitates abusing children online or,
(e) records in any electronic form own abuse or that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act
with children, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to five years and with a fine which may extend to ten lac rupees and in
the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lac rupees:
Provided that the provisions of section 67, section 67A and this section does not extend to any
book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation or figure in electronic form-
(i) The publication of which is proved to be justified as being for the public good on the ground
that such book, pamphlet, paper writing, drawing, painting, representation or figure is in the
interest of science, literature, art or learning or other objects of general concern; or
(ii) which is kept or used for bonafide heritage or religious purposes Explanation: For the
purposes of this section, "children" means a person who has not completed the age of 18 years.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 26

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredients are as follows:-
 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; or
 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; or
 Cultivates, entices or induces children to online relationship with one or more children for
and on sexually explicit act or in a manner that may offend a reasonable adult on the
computer resource; or
 Facilitates abusing children online; or
 Records in any electronic form own abuse or that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act
with children.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 27

 PRESERVATION AND RETENTION OF INFORMATION BY
INTERMEDIARIES

INTRODUCTION –
It has been stated under Section 67C for 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 Government 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 three years and shall
also be liable to fine”.

INGREDIENTS –
The ingredient of Section 67C stated that any intermediary who intentionally or knowingly
contravenes the provisions

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 28

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Sharma, Vakul, Handbook of Cyberlaws, Universal Law Publication, Reprint Edtion, 2010.
 Sharma, Vakul, Information Technology: Law and Practice, Universal Law Publishers, 2nd
edition, 2007.
 Verma, Dr Amita, Cyber Crimes and Law, Central Law Publishers, Allahabad, 2009.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROJECT Page 29