Assignment on 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000

Topic- Needs, Aims and Objectives of the Information

Technology Act, 2000

Submitted To - Ms. Aishwarya Jagga

Submitted by -

Levisha

254/21

Section-C

L.L.B 3rd semester 

Department of laws 

Panjab University
Introduction: 

In1996, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)adopted

the model law on electronic commerce (e-commerce) to bring uniformity in the law
indifferent countries. 

Further, the General Assembly of the United Nations recommended that all countries must
consider his model law before making changes to their own laws. India became the12th
country to enable cyber lawafteritpassedtheInformationTechnologyAct,2000. 

TheInformationTechnologyAct,2000orITA,2000orITAct,wasnotifiedonOctober17,2000.
ItisthelawthatdealswithcybercrimeandelectroniccommerceinIndia.Whilethefirstdraft
wascreatedbytheMinistryof 

Commerce,GovernmentofIndiaastheE-CommerceAct,1998, 

itwasredraftedasthe'InformationTechnologyBill,1999,and 

passedinMay2000. 

NeedoftheInformationTechnologyActInformationtechnologyisoneoftheimportantlaw
relatingtoIndiancyberlaws.CyberlawsarecontainedintheAct,2000.Thisactishelpfulto
promotebusinesswiththehelpofinternet.Itcontainssetofrulesandregulationswhichapply
onanyelectronicbusinesstransaction.Itis"AnActtoprovidelegalrecognitionfortransactions
carriedoutbymeansofelectronicdatainterchangeandothermeansofelectronic
communication,commonlyreferredtoas"electroniccommerce"whichinvolvetheuseof
alternativestopaper-basedmethodsofcommunicationandstorageofinformation,tofacilitate
electronicfilingofdocumentswiththeGovernmentagenciesandfurthertoamendtheIndian
PenalCode,theIndianEvidenceAct,1872,theBankers'BooksEvidenceAct.1891andthe
ReserveBankofIndiaAct,1934andformattersconnectedtherewithorincidentalthereto".
ITAct,2000focusesonthreemainhighlights: 

a)Providinglegalrecognitiontothetransactionswhicharecarriedoutthroughelectronic
meansoruseofInternet.b)Empoweringthegovernmentdepartmentstoacceptfilingcreating
andretentionofofficialdocumentsinthedigitalformatand 

c)Toamendoutdatedlawsandprovidewaystodealwithcybercrimes. 

ObjectivesofInformationTechnologyAct2000TheInformationTechnologyAct,2000provides
legalrecognitiontothetransactiondoneviaelectronicexchangeofdataandotherelectronic
meansofcommunicationorelectroniccommercetransactions. 

Thisalsoinvolvestheuseofalternativestoapaper-basedmethodofcommunicationand
informationstoragetofacilitatetheelectronicfilingofdocumentswiththeGovernment
agencies. 

Further,thisactamended: 

(a)theIndianPenalCode,1860 

(b)theIndianEvidenceAct,1872(c)theBankers'BooksEvidenceAct,1891and
(d)theReserveBankofIndiaAct,1934.
TheobjectivesoftheActareasfollows: 

a)Togivelegalrecognitiontoanytransactionthisisdoneby 

electronicwayoruseofinternet 

b)Togivelegalrecognitiontodigitalsignatureforaccepting 

anyagreementviacomputer. 

c)Toprovidefacilityoffillingdocumentsonlinerelatingto 

schooladmissionorregistrationinemploymentexchange. 

d)AccordingtoI.T.Act2000,anycompanycanstoretheirdatainelectronicstorage.
e)Tostopcomputercrimeandprotectprivacyofinternetusers. 

f)TogivemorepowertoIPO,RBIandIndianEvidenceactforrestrictingelectroniccrime.g)To
givelegalrecognitionforkeepingbooksofaccountsbybankersandothercompaniesin
electronicform. 

ApplicationofInformationTechnologyAct: 

Theactshallapplyto 

a)Processingofpersonaldataorpartlybyautomaticmeans,andb)Otherprocessingof
personaldatawhichformpartoforareintendedtoformpartofpersonaldatafilingsystem. 
Thisactshallnotapplytothefollowing:
a)InformationtechnologyAct2000isnotapplicableontheattestationforcreatingtrustvia
electronicway.Physicalattestationismust. 

b)Contractofsaleofanyimmovableproperty. 

c)Attestationforgivingpowerofattorneyofpropertyisnotpossibleviaelectronicrecord.
OverridingEffectoftheAct: 

TheprovisionsoftheActaretohaveeffectnotwithstandinganythinginconsistenttherewith
containedinanyotherlaw.Thismeansthattheprovisionsofthisactoverrideanyexisting
principlesofthisactshallnotrestrictanypersonfromexercisinganyrightconferredunderthe
copyrightactorthepatentsact. 

JudicialPrecedents: 

TheapplicationandwiseimplementationoftheITAct,2000anditsall-importantAmendment
of2008arevisibleincertainnotablejudgmentsproducedatvariouscourts 

ShreyaSinghalv.UOI 

ThisjudgmentbytheSupremeCourtin2015struckdown$66AoftheITActwhichrelatesto
restrictionsononline.speech.Intheverdict,theCourtstatesthattheSectionwas
unconstitutionalongroundsofviolatingthefreedomofspeechthatisguaranteedunderArt. 19(1)
(a)oftheConstitution. 
TheSupremeCourtfurtherheldthattheSectionwasnottobesavedbyvirtueofbeinga
reasonablerestriction.Thiscaseisconsideredtobeadefiningmomentforonlinefreespeech
inIndia. 

⚫ N.Firosv.StateofKerala 

Theappellant,inthiscase,developedaprojectcalledFRIENDSfortheKeralaGovernment.The
softwareforFRIENDSwascreatedunderacontractforMicrosoftandtherewasacopyrightsuit
pendingwiththeGovernment.Simultaneously,theKeralaGovernmentissuedanotification
under§70oftheITActstatingthattheFRIENDSprojectalongwiththesoftwaremustbe
consideredasa'protectedsystem'.TheSupremeCourteventuallyheldthattheGovernmenthas
thepowertodeclareany'Governmentwork'tobea'protectedsystem'undertheITAct. 

Conclusion 

Duringthelasttwodecades,InformationTechnologysectorhaswitnessedexponentialgrowth. 

Technologyhasbecomepartandparcelofourdailylifeandhasmultipliereffectineverysector
ofindustryThemajorpitfallofthisphenomenalgrowthhasgivenrisetocybercrimesatan
alarmingrate.Tocombatthisgrowingchallenge,firstlegislationcameintheyear2000.Since
CyberCriminalswerefoundtobeastepaheadoftechnology,regularamendmentsbecame
needofthehour.Therefore,afterintroductionofAct2000manyamendments/notificationsare
beingissuedasperrequirement.Inthisanswerwehavediscussedthelegislationssofar
introducedandproposedtheimprovementsthatcanbeincorporatedonissueslikespamming,
phishing,integrityoftransactionsandpornographyinfurtheramendmentsofITAct.