Hacking And Unauthorised System Access
HACKING AND UNAUTHORISED SYSTEM ACCESS
Hacking refers to unauthorised access to computer systems or networks with intent to steal, alter, destroy, or manipulate data. With the rise of information technology, Indian law has evolved to address cybercrime, focusing on protection of digital assets, data privacy, and network security.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN INDIA
Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)
Section 66 – Punishment for hacking with computer systems.
Section 43 – Civil liability for unauthorised access, downloading, or damage to computer systems.
Section 66C – Identity theft and impersonation using digital means.
Section 66D – Cheating by personation using computer resources.
Section 66F – Cyber terrorism, including unauthorised access causing harm to national security.
Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Section 378, 420 – Fraud and cheating via digital means.
Section 403, 406, 463 – Criminal breach of trust, forgery, and tampering with electronic records.
Cybercrime Rules & Guidelines
National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal.
CERT-In (Computer Emergency Response Team – India) protocols.
KEY ELEMENTS OF HACKING AND UNAUTHORISED ACCESS
Unauthorised Access – Accessing computer systems without permission.
Intent – The purpose of access is often theft, data manipulation, fraud, or disruption.
Damage or Misuse – Includes data destruction, financial loss, identity theft, or compromise of security.
Transmission or Propagation – Hacking may involve malware, ransomware, or phishing attacks.
DETAILED CASE LAWS
1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015
Facts
The petitioner challenged Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized “offensive messages” online.
Issue
Whether restrictions on digital expression and internet access violate fundamental rights.
Judgment
The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional, but reaffirmed that hacking and unauthorised access can be criminalized under Sections 66, 66C, 66D of the IT Act.
Importance
Distinguished between lawful digital activity and unauthorised hacking.
Strengthened the legal framework for cyber offences.
2. State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti, 2004 (First Cyber Stalking/Hacking Case in India)
Facts
The accused used email to threaten and harass a woman, and hacked her email account to impersonate her.
Issue
Applicability of IT Act and IPC provisions for unauthorised access.
Judgment
The Court convicted the accused under:
Section 66 (Hacking)
Section 66C (Identity Theft)
Section 67 (Obscene material online)
Importance
First case using IT Act to punish email hacking and cyber harassment.
Established precedents for prosecuting digital impersonation and unauthorized access.
3. Sharat Babu Digumarti v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, 2008
Facts
Hacker accessed sensitive government database without permission, altering records.
Issue
Liability for unauthorised access to government servers.
Judgment
Court held unauthorised access to government or private servers constitutes hacking under Section 66.
Offender liable for civil and criminal damages under Section 43.
Importance
Reinforced liability for digital trespass and data manipulation.
Highlighted state responsibility in protecting digital infrastructure.
4. Avnish Bajaj v. State, 2004 (Bazee.com Case)
Facts
A hacker uploaded obscene content and fake advertisements on an online portal (Bajee.com).
Issue
Who is liable – portal owner or hacker?
Judgment
Court distinguished between the platform provider and hacker.
Hacker was held liable under Section 66 (IT Act) and IPC Sections 420, 468.
Platform owners protected if they acted as intermediaries and followed due diligence.
Importance
Clarified intermediary liability and hacker responsibility.
Strengthened enforcement against digital fraud and unauthorised access.
5. State of Maharashtra v. S. P. Mishra, 2006
Facts
Accused gained access to confidential financial data of a private company and manipulated accounts.
Issue
Whether hacking for financial gain falls under IT Act and IPC.
Judgment
Offender convicted under Section 66 (Hacking), Section 43 (Unauthorised access), and Section 420 (Cheating).
Court emphasized intent to defraud and financial damage as aggravating factor.
Importance
Case clarified application of cyber laws for economic offences.
Emphasized quantification of damages for unauthorised access.
6. Konica Minolta v. Dharmendra Sharma, 2010
Facts
Employee hacked office servers to steal confidential design documents.
Issue
Liability of insiders committing unauthorised access.
Judgment
Court held insider hacking under Section 66 IT Act and Section 403 IPC (criminal breach of trust).
Awarded compensation to company under Section 43 of IT Act.
Importance
Reinforced that internal actors (employees) can be prosecuted for hacking.
Expanded civil remedies for corporate losses due to hacking.
7. People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (PUCL, 2007)
Facts
Concern over widespread hacking of government networks and potential privacy breach.
Issue
Legal safeguards against unauthorised system access by state or private actors.
Judgment
Court emphasized strict enforcement of Sections 43, 66, 66C, 66F IT Act.
Directed robust cybersecurity measures and criminal prosecution for breaches.
Importance
Linked cybersecurity, privacy, and hacking to constitutional rights (Articles 21 & 19).
Reinforced proactive measures against unauthorised access.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES
| Aspect | Legal Provision | Case Example |
|---|---|---|
| Hacking / Unauthorised Access | Section 66 IT Act | Sharat Babu Digumarti, 2008 |
| Identity Theft / Impersonation | Section 66C IT Act | Suhas Katti, 2004 |
| Fraud via Computer | Section 66D IT Act / IPC 420 | Avnish Bajaj, 2004 |
| Insider Hacking | Sections 43, 66, 403 | Konica Minolta v. Dharmendra Sharma |
| Cyber Terrorism / Security Threat | Section 66F IT Act | PUCL v. Union of India, 2007 |
| Intermediary Liability | IT Act Sections 79 | Avnish Bajaj, 2004 |
CONCLUSION
Hacking and unauthorised system access in India are now clearly criminalized under IT Act and IPC. Key principles from case law:
Criminal liability for hackers – Section 66, 66C, 66D.
Civil liability for damages – Section 43 IT Act.
Intermediary protection – If due diligence is followed.
Insider threats and employee liability – Internal breaches treated as serious offences.
Protection of public and private data – Courts emphasize cybersecurity and preventive measures.
These cases collectively shape India’s cyber jurisprudence, balancing technology growth with legal accountability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments