Information Technology Act, 2000
|Information Technology Act, 2000|
|An 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 facilitate 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 for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.|
|Citation||Act No 21 of 2000|
|Enacted by||Parliament of India|
|Date enacted||9 June 2000|
|Date assented to||9 June 2000|
|Date commenced||17 October 2000|
|The Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008|
The Information Technology Act 2000 (also known as ITA-2000, or the IT Act) is an Act of the Indian Parliament (No 21 of 2000) notified on October 17, 2000. This act is being opposed by Save Your Voice campaign and other civil society organizations in India. User-review and consumer social networking site MouthShut.com has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India to repeal and nullify parts of IT Act 2000.
The United Nations General Assembly by resolution A/RES/51/162, dated the 30 January 1997 has adopted the Model Law on Electronic Commerce adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. This is referred to as the UNCITRAL Model Law on E-Commerce. Following the UN Resolution India passed the Information Technology Act 2000 in May 2000,which came into force on October 17, 2000. The Information Technology Act 2000 has been substantially amended through the Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008 which was passed by the two houses of the Indian Parliament on December 23, and 24, 2008. It got the Presidential assent on February 5, 2009 and came into force on October 27, 2009. The amended Act has provided additional focus on information security. It has added several new sections on offences including cyber terrorism and data protection. A set of Rules related to sensitive personal information and reasonable security practices (mentioned in section 43A of the ITAA, 2008) was notified in April 2011 
Information technology Act 2000 consisted of 94 sections segregated into 13 chapters. Four schedules form part of the Act. In the 2008 version of the Act, there are 124 sections (excluding 5 sections that have been omitted from the earlier version) and 14 chapters. Schedule I and II have been replaced. Schedules III and IV are deleted.
Information Technology Act 2000 addressed the following issues:
- Legal recognition of electronic documents
- Legal Recognition of digital signatures
- Offenses and contraventions
- Justice dispensation systems for cybercrimes
According to Section 10A of information technology Act,2000(amended in 2008)it also validates E-contracts.
|65||Tampering with computer source documents - Intentional concealment, destruction or alteration of source code when the computer source code is required to be kept or maintained by law for the time being in force||Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to 2 lakh rupees|
|66||Hacking||Imprisonment up to three years, or/and with fine up to 5 lakh rupees|
The 2008 Amendment Act was passed in an eventful Parliamentary session on 23 December 2008 with no discussion in the House. Some of the cyber law observers have criticized the amendments on the ground of lack of legal and procedural safeguards to prevent violation of civil liberties of Indians. There have also been appreciation about the amendments from many observers because it addresses the issue of Cyber Security.
Section 69 empowers the Central Government/State Government/ its authorized agency to intercept, monitor or decrypt any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource if it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence or for investigation of any offence. They can also secure assistance from computer personnel in decrypting data (see mandatory decryption), under penalty of imprisonment.
Section 66A is widely criticized. It has led to numerous abuses reported by the press. Section 66A has also been criticised and challenged in Lucknow and Madras High Courts for its constitutional validity. Based on Section 66A, Bombay High Court has held that creating a website and storing false information on it can entail cyber crime. On 24 March 2015, Supreme Court of India struck down Section 66A of the IT Act as unconstitutional on the grounds of violating Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India which grants freedom of speech and expression. Describing the law as "vague in its entirety," the judges said, it encroaches upon "the public's right to know.
Multinational companies with offices in India have raised concerns about their ability to outsource data processing to India because of requirements in the act to report when medical information is moved into or out of India.
- Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, CIS India
- If Speaking The Truth Is Sedition, Then I Am Guilty
- Creating a website can entail cyber crime: HC
- "SC quashes Section 66A of IT Act: Key points of court verdict". Times of India. 24 March 2015. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- Sriram, Jayant. "SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A". The Hindu.
- Lakshmi, Rama (21 May 2011). "India data privacy rules may be too strict for some U.S. companies - The Washington Post". The Washington Post (Washington DC: WPC). ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 31 January 2015.