As we have discussed in the earlier articles, under the amended Information Technology Act, Section 66 has been completed

amended to remove the definition of hacking. Amendments also introduced a series of new provisions under Section 66 covering almost all major cyber crime incidents. From this article onwards we will look at those sections. With internet and telecommunication virtually controlling communication amongst people, amendments in the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) have made it clear that transmission of any text, audio or video that is offensive or has a menacing character can land a sender in jail. The punishment will also be attracted if the content is false and has been transmitted for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger or insult.

Incidents
5-6 pc of spam e-mails originate from India - The share of spam e-mails originating from India is about 5-6 per cent of the total worldwide spam email traffic. FB effect, B'lore: IIMB girl kills self for boyfriend. Girl's friend charged with abetment to suicide as well as under the provisions of the Information Technology Act. Malini Murmu, 22, a first year MBA student from the prestigious Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Bangalore allegedly committed suicide after her boyfriend dumped her and made the announcement on Facebook. Police sources say Malini left behind a suicide note saying she was killing herself since her boyfriend left her. Investigations revealed that on the day she killed herself, Malini and her boyfriend had an argument which led to the breakup. Later her boyfriend left a post on Facebook saying, "feeling super cool today, dumped my new ex-girlfriend. Happy independence day".

The Law
Section 66A of the IT Act is a relevant section which penalizes sending false and offensive messages through communication services. The section reads as under 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 by making use of such computer resource or a communication device, 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. Punishment - Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine. Explanation For the purpose 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, images, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message. The section covers tow different acts 1. Sending offensive or menacing messages sent by using electronic communication means. 2. Sending false messages to cheat, mislead or deceive people or to cause annoyance to them. While proving false message is relatively easy, but the real question is What constitutes an electronic message to be offensive or of menacing character? Indian law has not defined anywhere the meaning of offensive or menacing. As per the laws of general English, a person receiving message should find that

to be offensive to apply this provision, so its interpretation becomes relative and differs from person to person. Cyber crimes like, intentionally sending SPAM messages, phishing emails, threatening messages, etc. can also be punished under this section. This section is also applied along with Section 67 or 67B which is related to cyber and child pornography respectively.

New Delhi: The government has modified rules under the controversial Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act in the wake of its alleged misuse in recent few cases. This comes a day after a 19-year-old boy was questioned by the police in Palghar over an alleged Facebook post against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray. This also comes amidst the row over the arrest of two girls in Palghar over a Facebook post on late Shiv Sena founder Bal Thackeray. The government has issued an advisory to states on how to implement the controversial Section 66(A) of the IT Act. Government sources say that a prior approval from the Deputy Commissioner or IGP level officers is needed before the Station House Officer can register such complaints. Government sources also say that the Maharashtra incident was not justified. Sources say the government acted on civil society fears that Section 66(A) was unconstitutional and open to misinterpretation.

Video Photo Gallery

Meawhile, a Delhi student has also filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court challenging Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act which was invoked to arrest two girls in Palghar. The petition wants the offence under Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act to be made non-cognizable. The Supreme Court will hear the petition on Thursday afternoon. Thane Superintendent of Police (rural) and Palghar police station Sub-Inspector were suspended for disobeying the orders of superiors while arresting two girls from Palghar for the Facebook post. The Shiv Sena had called for bandh in Palghar on Wednesday to protest against the action on the policemen in the Facebook arrest case. Maharashtra Home Minister RR Patil said that the police officials were suspended for disobeying the orders of the IG of Konkan zone. Meanwhile, in another case a 19-year-old boy has spoken out after his Facebook account was allegedly hacked and used to abuse MNS chief Raj Thackeray. The boy maintains that he never wrote the controversial post but believes it was written to create enmity in Palghar where a large number of North Indians live. The boy was questioned about the post and let off on Wednesday after the MNS complained. A case has been filed against an unknown person under the IT Act. The Thane Cyber crime Cell is in the process of tracking the hacker. What the Section 66 (A) of IT Act says: 1 Punishment for sending offensive messages via electronic mail message 2 Any electronic mail message that is grossly offensive or is menacing 3 Any false info causing annoyance, insult, danger 4 Causing inconvenience 5 Deceiving or misleading recipient 6 If guilty, faces up to 3 years in jail and a penalty. New guidelines:

No less than a police officer of a rank of DCP will be allowed to permit registration of a case under provisions of the Information Technlogy Act that deals with spreading hatred through electronic messages, following uproar over recent arrests under the controversial law. In the case of metropolitan cities, such an approval would have to come at the level of Inspector General of Police. "... the concerned police officer or police station may not register any complaints (under Section 66 (A)) unless he has obtained prior approval at the level of an officer not below the DCP rank in urban and rural areas and IG level in metros," a top source said.

Ex-Employee Sends Obscene/Threatening Email To Superior Colleague

The lady complainant received number of obscene/ threatening email during the period November 2005 to January 2006. A crime was registered under section 67 of Information Technology Act 2000 read with section 507 of I.P.C. During investigation the email sender was traced & accused lady arrested. On interrogation of the accused it is revealed that she is an ex-employee of the complainants organisation and was working under the complainant for a year. The accused posing as a male sent all these emails to take revenge for the alleged ill-treatment meted out to her. This is an example of a disgruntled employee indulging in such type of Cyber Crime that is punishable with up to 5 years of imprisonment & fine of Rs. 1 lac