CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Law relating to Information Technology
An intermediary, Netlink Services, intentionally refuses technical assistance to a Government agency authorised to monitor and collect traffic data for cyber security under Section 69B. Which is the correct statement of the punishment as the Act now stands?
The intermediary is punishable with imprisonment up to one year or fine up to one crore rupees, or both. Section 69B(4), as amended in 2023, replaced the older punishment of three years imprisonment and fine for intentional or knowing refusal of technical assistance.
- AImprisonment up to one year, or fine up to one crore rupees, or bothCorrect
- BImprisonment up to three years and also liable to fine
- CFine only, up to one lakh rupees
- DCompensation only, payable to the agency
Explanation
Section 69B(4), as substituted in 2023, provides imprisonment up to one year or fine up to one crore rupees, or both, for an intermediary who intentionally or knowingly contravenes sub-section (2). The earlier text of three years and fine has been replaced, so that option is outdated.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Information Technology shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Law relating to Information Technology questions
- The Controller recognised a foreign Certifying Authority under section 19(1). Later, the Controller finds that it contravened the conditions…
- Under the Information Technology Act, 2000 as it now stands, which body serves as the Appellate Tribunal for hearing appeals against orders …
- Sunil files an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under the IT Act, 2000 on the 60th day after receiving the order, explaining that he was…
- An electronic signature is deemed a secure electronic signature under Section 15 if the signature creation data, at the time of affixing, wa…
- Meghna Traders, a proprietorship firm in Pune, stores customers' sensitive personal data on its own server. Because it was negligent in main…
- Ravi Traders is aggrieved by an order of an adjudicating officer under the IT Act, 2000. It receives a copy of the order on 1 March. Within …