Technology And Emerging Crimes In Legislation

04 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

Technology and Emerging Crimes in Legislation

1. Introduction

With the rapid advancement of technology — including the internet, artificial intelligence, blockchain, and digital communications — traditional laws have struggled to keep pace with new forms of crime. These “emerging crimes” include cybercrime, data theft, online fraud, cyberstalking, identity theft, ransomware attacks, and misuse of social media platforms. Legislatures worldwide have had to create or amend laws to address these technological threats.

2. Key Technological Crimes

Type of Crime	Description
Cybercrime	Offenses that target computers, networks, or data (e.g., hacking, DDoS attacks).
Data Theft & Privacy Violations	Unauthorized access, use, or sharing of personal data.
Online Fraud	Phishing, financial scams, or fake e-commerce sites.
Cyberbullying & Harassment	Use of technology to threaten or humiliate individuals.
Intellectual Property Crimes	Piracy, plagiarism, and digital content theft.

3. Legislative Framework

A. International Context

Budapest Convention on Cybercrime (2001): First international treaty to address internet and computer crime.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, EU 2018): Provides strict data protection and privacy standards.

B. Indian Context

Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) – India’s primary cyber law.

Amendment (2008) – Introduced sections on cyber terrorism, identity theft, and child pornography.

Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Applied alongside IT Act for offenses like fraud, defamation, and criminal intimidation.

4. Important Case Laws

Here are five detailed landmark cases illustrating how courts have handled technology-related crimes.

Case 1: Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1

Facts:
Section 66A of the IT Act criminalized sending "offensive" messages through communication services. It was frequently misused to arrest people for posting opinions or criticism online.

Issue:
Whether Section 66A violated the fundamental right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional, holding that:

The terms “grossly offensive” and “menacing” were vague and subjective.

The law had a chilling effect on free speech.

Importance:
This case set a crucial precedent ensuring that cyber legislation respects constitutional rights while balancing online safety.

Case 2: State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004)

Facts:
The accused posted obscene and defamatory content about a woman in a Yahoo! message group and created fake online profiles using her name.

Issue:
Whether creating fake profiles and posting obscene messages constitutes an offense under the IT Act and IPC.

Judgment:
The accused was convicted under:

Section 67 of the IT Act (publishing obscene material online), and

Sections 469 and 509 of IPC (defamation and insult to modesty of a woman).

He was sentenced to imprisonment and fine.

Importance:
This was one of the first cybercrime convictions in India, showing how online harassment and identity theft are punishable under both cyber and traditional criminal laws.

Case 3: CBI v. Arif Azim (2008) – “Yahoo Email Hacking Case”

Facts:
Arif Azim, a young professional, hacked into a U.S. citizen’s Yahoo email account and used the information for fraudulent activities.

Issue:
Whether unauthorized access to another person’s email constitutes an offense under IT Act Section 66.

Judgment:
The court found him guilty under Section 66 (computer-related offenses) of the IT Act. He was fined and sentenced to imprisonment.

Importance:
This case clarified that unauthorized email access or hacking falls squarely under “computer-related offenses” even if the system is located outside India, highlighting cross-border applicability of cyber laws.

Case 4: Syed Asifuddin & Ors v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2005)

Facts:
The accused cloned the ESN (Electronic Serial Number) and MIN (Mobile Identification Number) of mobile phones, creating duplicate handsets that operated on legitimate subscribers’ accounts.

Issue:
Whether tampering with mobile identification codes constitutes “tampering with computer source documents” under Section 65 of the IT Act.

Judgment:
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that mobile phones are “computers” under the IT Act. Therefore, tampering with mobile identification numbers was punishable under Section 65.

Importance:
This case expanded the definition of "computer" to include mobile devices, making mobile-based offenses punishable under the IT Act.

Case 5: Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India (2013)

Facts:
A PIL was filed seeking a ban on online pornography, arguing that it promoted sexual violence and child exploitation.

Issue:
Whether the government should be directed to block all pornographic websites in India.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court recognized the difficulty of a blanket ban but directed the government to block child pornography and illegal sexual content under Section 69A of the IT Act.

Importance:
This case highlighted the balance between freedom of expression and morality, emphasizing the state’s role in regulating illegal online content.