Cyber crime cases in India are charged under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act), often together with cheating and related offences in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Offences committed before 1 July 2024 remain under the Indian Penal Code. Typical cases involve unauthorised access to accounts, misuse of passwords and OTPs, impersonation calls and messages, and the circulation of private or obscene images.
This guide is for people accused in such cases, for victims of online fraud, and for companies whose systems or data have been misused. We act for accused persons and for complainants, including companies.
Offences under the IT Act
Section 43 lists acts done without the permission of the owner or person in charge of a computer, system or network: accessing it, downloading or copying data, introducing a virus, damaging or disrupting it, denying access to authorised users, and deleting or altering information. On its own, Section 43 carries a penalty and compensation. Under Section 66, doing any of those acts dishonestly or fraudulently is an offence punishable with imprisonment up to three years, or fine up to five lakh rupees, or both.
Several offences cover the most common online frauds and abuse:
- Section 66C (identity theft): fraudulent or dishonest use of another person's electronic signature, password or other unique identification feature; up to three years and fine up to one lakh rupees.
- Section 66D (cheating by personation using a communication device or computer resource): up to three years and fine up to one lakh rupees.
- Section 66E (violation of privacy): capturing, publishing or transmitting an image of a person's private area without consent; up to three years, or fine up to two lakh rupees, or both.
- Section 67 (obscene material in electronic form): up to three years and fine up to five lakh rupees; on a later conviction, up to five years and fine up to ten lakh rupees.
- Sections 67A and 67B (sexually explicit material, and such material involving children): up to five years and fine up to ten lakh rupees; up to seven years on a later conviction.
Arrest, bail and who investigates
Section 77B says that, despite the CrPC, an offence punishable with imprisonment of three years and above is cognizable, and an offence punishable with three years is bailable. Most offences in Sections 66 to 66E carry a maximum of three years, so they are cognizable and bailable. Section 77B does not make offences with longer terms, such as those under Sections 67A and 67B, bailable.
Under Section 78, an offence under the IT Act must be investigated by a police officer not below the rank of Inspector. A charge sheet filed after investigation by a junior officer can be questioned on that ground.
Section 66A and blocking under Section 69A
Section 66A punished sending grossly offensive or menacing information, or information known to be false and sent to cause annoyance or insult, through a computer resource or communication device. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional. In Dr. Rini Johar v. State of M.P., (2016) 11 SCC 703, the Court recorded that it was struck down in its entirety as violating Article 19(1)(a) and not saved by Article 19(2), and refused to apply it. A charge under Section 66A today should be challenged.
Section 69A lets the Central Government, for reasons recorded in writing, direct an agency or intermediary to block public access to information on grounds such as sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State or public order. An intermediary that fails to comply faces imprisonment up to seven years and fine.
Online fraud under the BNS
Most online money frauds are also charged as cheating. Section 318(1) of the BNS defines cheating, and Section 318(2) punishes it with up to three years, or fine, or both. Where the person deceived is induced to deliver property, Section 318(4) of the BNS (formerly Section 420 of the IPC) provides up to seven years and fine. Section 319 of the BNS covers cheating by personation, punishable with up to five years, or fine, or both.
For a fraud before 1 July 2024, the FIR and charge will refer to the IPC instead.
Electronic evidence and the certificate requirement
Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), formerly Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, governs the admissibility of electronic records. Under Section 63(4), a certificate identifying the record and describing how it was produced must be submitted along with the record each time it is offered in evidence. It is signed by the person in charge of the computer or communication device, or of the relevant activities, and by an expert, in the form in the Schedule.
Under the old law, the Supreme Court in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1, held that the Section 65B(4) certificate is a condition precedent to admitting an electronic record and that oral evidence cannot take its place. Screenshots, call records, chat exports and CCTV footage are often challenged at trial for want of a proper certificate, so both sides should deal with it early.
Frozen bank accounts and steps for victims
The police often freeze bank accounts that received money from a fraud. Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 102 of the CrPC) allows a police officer to seize property suspected to be stolen or found in suspicious circumstances, and requires the seizure to be reported forthwith to the Magistrate. In Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen (2024), an appeal from the Madras High Court, the Supreme Court held that delay in reporting the freezing does not by itself vitiate the seizure, and that the Magistrate may direct action against the officer responsible for an unexplained delay.
If you have lost money to an online fraud, these practical steps (not legal requirements) help the bank and police act quickly:
- Tell your bank or payment provider at once and ask them to hold the transaction.
- Report to the police cyber crime wing with transaction references, dates, amounts and the numbers, accounts or links used.
- Keep screenshots, messages and call logs, and do not delete the app or chat used in the fraud.
Supreme Court decisions
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India(2015) 5 SCC 1
Section 66A of the IT Act was declared unconstitutional and struck down in its entirety.
Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal(2020) 7 SCC 1
The certificate under Section 65B(4) (now Section 63 BSA) is a condition precedent to admitting an electronic record; oral evidence cannot replace it.
Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen[2024] 6 S.C.R. 409
Delay by the police in reporting the freezing of bank accounts to the Magistrate does not by itself vitiate the seizure.
Questions
Is an IT Act offence bailable?
Under Section 77B, an offence punishable with three years is bailable, and most offences in Sections 66 to 66E carry three years. Offences under Sections 67A and 67B carry longer terms, and any BNS offence charged alongside has its own bail rule.
The police have registered a case against me under Section 66A. What now?
Section 66A was struck down in Shreya Singhal (2015), and the Court has since refused to apply it. A charge under it can be challenged before the High Court, and any other charges examined separately.
Can screenshots and WhatsApp chats be used as evidence?
Yes, if they are proved in the way Section 63 of the BSA requires, which includes a certificate submitted with the record. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020) held that, under the old Section 65B, the certificate is a condition precedent to admissibility.
My bank account was frozen because someone sent money into it. How do I get it released?
The freezing is a seizure that must be reported forthwith to the Magistrate under Section 106 of the BNSS. In Shento Varghese (2024), the Supreme Court held that late reporting alone does not make the freeze invalid. The right forum and the papers to file for release depend on the stage of the case, so take advice with your bank statements in hand.
This guide is general information on Indian criminal law as at 21 October 2026. It is not legal advice on any particular case.