Information Technology Act 2000 Section 66: Computer-Related Offences (2026)

Explainer · Cyber Law · IT Act

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 turns a civil wrong into a crime. If any of the acts listed in Section 43, such as unauthorised access, data theft, introducing a virus or damaging a system, is done dishonestly or fraudulently, it becomes a criminal offence under Section 66. The punishment is imprisonment up to three years, or a fine up to five lakh rupees, or both. This explainer sets out what Section 66 covers, the role of a guilty mind, the punishment and procedure, and the key case law. Last verified October 2026.

01The short answer

Section 66 is the main criminal provision for computer offences in the IT Act. It takes the list of acts in Section 43, such as hacking, data theft and damaging a system, and makes them a crime when they are done with a dishonest or fraudulent mind.

The punishment is jail for up to three years, or a fine up to five lakh rupees, or both. The same facts can also support a civil compensation claim under Section 43.

02What Section 66 says

Section 66 does not list fresh acts of its own. It points back to Section 43 and says: if any act referred to in that section is done dishonestly or fraudulently, the person shall be punished. So the conduct is the same, and the extra ingredient is the guilty mind.

The acts drawn from Section 43 include:

• accessing a computer, system or network without permission;
• downloading, copying or stealing data;
• introducing a virus or contaminant;
• damaging or disrupting a computer, data or network; and
• denying access to an authorised user.

Section 66 was inserted in its present form by the 2008 amendment, which came into force on 27 October 2009. The older version of Section 66 used the word "hacking"; the amendment replaced it with this wider computer-related offence.

03The role of a guilty mind

The line between Section 43 and Section 66 is the state of mind. Section 43 is a civil wrong and does not need any intention. Section 66 is a crime and needs the act to be done "dishonestly" or "fraudulently".

This is why not every unauthorised access is a Section 66 crime. A careless or mistaken act may found a civil claim under Section 43, but the prosecution must prove a dishonest or fraudulent intent to make it an offence under Section 66.

04Punishment and procedure

The punishment under Section 66 is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or a fine which may extend to five lakh rupees, or both.

Because the maximum jail term is three years, the offence under Section 66 is bailable under the scheme of Section 77B of the IT Act, which makes offences punishable with three years or more cognizable and those punishable up to three years bailable. A police officer not below the rank of Inspector investigates offences under the Act, under Section 78.

A victim can run both tracks at once: a criminal complaint under Section 66 and a civil claim for compensation before the adjudicating officer under Section 43.

05Key case law

The most important thing to know about this part of the Act is what was struck down. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A, which had punished sending "offensive" messages, as unconstitutional for being vague and violating free speech. Section 66A is no longer law, even though it is still sometimes wrongly invoked.

Section 66 itself, about dishonest or fraudulent computer acts, was not struck down and remains in force. Courts and adjudicating officers have applied Section 66 together with Section 43 in cases of unauthorised bank transfers, account takeovers and data theft, and alongside the identity and cheating offences in Section 66C and Section 66D.

06A practical note

If someone has hacked, defrauded or stolen from you through a computer or phone, Section 66 is usually the core charge, often with Section 66C, Section 66D and the cheating provisions of the criminal code. To start the process, see how to file a cyber crime complaint and how to report cyber crime and online fraud.

Do not invoke Section 66A, which no longer exists. Preserve the digital evidence early, because an electronic trail that is lost is hard to rebuild.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

How a Section 66 charge is likely to run, and what proof of dishonest intent courts expect, often turns on earlier rulings. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments and orders, with Supreme Court decisions from 1950 and High Court decisions from 1990, in under 5 seconds, so you can see how Section 66 and the related cyber offences have been read. You can also track a live FIR, charge sheet or appeal by party or advocate name across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, and get the next hearing date without checking cause lists by hand. Claw does not use the documents you upload to train its AI models.

Create a free Claw account to track a Section 66 case or appeal and follow every hearing, and use case search across Indian courts to find how the offence has been applied in similar matters.

08Sources and further reading

• India Code (Information Technology Act, 2000, bare text): indiacode.nic.in
• PRS Legislative Research (IT Act and amendments): prsindia.org
• Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY): meity.gov.in
• Claw: clawlaw.in

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The law changes through amendments and judgments, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you act.

09Frequently asked questions