Information Technology Act : Practice Questions and Answers

Section 84 of the IT Act, 2000 protects the Controller (and any person acting on their behalf) from suits or prosecution for actions taken in good faith under the Act. The protection also extends to the Central Government, State Government, Presiding Officer, adjudicating officers, and staff of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal — but not specifically to subscribers or originators.

Section 10 of the IT Act, 2000 empowers the Central Government to prescribe rules regarding electronic signatures, including: (a) type of electronic signature, (b) manner and format of affixing it, (c) procedure for identifying the person affixing it, (d) control processes to ensure integrity, security, and confidentiality, and (e) any other matter necessary to give legal effect to electronic signatures. The word 'electronic signature' was substituted for 'digital signature' by the IT (Amendment) Act, 2009.

Section 85 of the IT Act, 2000 provides that a company officer is not liable to punishment if they prove the contravention occurred without their knowledge or that they took all reasonable steps to prevent it. However, if a director, manager, or officer is responsible through consent, connivance, or gross negligence, they are liable to punishment.

Section 16 of the IT Act, 2000 empowers the Central Government to prescribe security procedures and practices for the purposes of Sections 14 and 15. While prescribing these, the Central Government considers commercial circumstances, nature of transactions, technological sophistication of parties, volume of similar transactions, availability of alternatives, and cost of alternative procedures.

Section 10A of the IT Act, 2000 provides that where proposals, acceptances, or revocations in a contract are expressed in electronic form or via electronic records, the contract shall not be deemed unenforceable solely because electronic means were used. The electronic form does not affect the enforceability of the contract.

In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (AIR 2015 SC 1523), the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, which criminalized online speech. The Court balanced Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech) with reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), holding that liberty of thought and expression is of paramount significance in a democracy.

Section 43 of the IT Act, 2000 deals with civil liability — penalties and compensation for damage to computers and computer systems. Anyone who without permission accesses, downloads data, introduces a virus, or causes denial of access can be liable for a penalty up to ₹1 crore. Activities covered include damaging, disrupting, or denying access to computer systems or networks.

Section 78 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with power to investigate offences. It states that, notwithstanding anything in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a police officer not below the rank of Inspector shall investigate any offence under this Act.

Under Section 66F of the Information Technology Act, 2000, cyber terrorism refers to intentionally threatening the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India, or causing terror in the people using cyberspace. It is punishable with imprisonment for life.