False profile covered under Information Technology Act?

Tilak Marg Forum for Legal Questions Forums Criminal Law False profile covered under Information Technology Act?

Tagged: 

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #1596
      Anonymous
      Guest

      A person is my Facebook friend. I do not know him personally but I came to know him only through Facebook. Recently, he cheated me of Rs. 15000/-. After some enquiries after this cheating, I came to know that his profile in Facebook is false and the name and education details shown in his Facebook profile are not correct. Even the job shown in a company is mentioned falsely since that company says there is no such person in their company. Is putting a false profile on Facebook and then cheating are offences under Information Technology Act or other laws?

    • #1647

      The facts narrated by you may make out an offence under Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and also an offence under Section 420 of IPC, depending upon whether the ingredients of these offences are satisfied (from the limited facts mentioned by you, these offences appear to be made out).

      Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act (I.T. Act) is reproduced below:

      66-D. Punishment for cheating by personation by using computer resource.—Whoever, by means of any communication device or computer resource cheats by personation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees.”

      I may also point out that in the case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1, the Supreme Court has struck down Section 66-A of the Information Technology Act, in its entirety, being violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and not saved under Article 19(2). Though now it is only of academic interest, but in the facts mentioned by you, even offence under Section 66-A might have been attracted. But, as I mentioned above, now Section 66-A has been struck down and has been held to be unconstitutional and therefore, it is of no use. However, for the sake of record, I am reproducing Section 66-A of the IT Act (which is not valid) in red ink and strikethrough font:

      66-A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.—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; or

      (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,

      shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.

      Explanation.— For the purposes 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, image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message.

       

           


      Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • The forum ‘Criminal Law’ is closed to new Questions and replies.

You may also like to read these topics:

Someone using my Internet login details to spread fake news on social media