Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    It Act, 2000

    Uploaded by

    Rakshit Taneja
    Both Aman Srivastava and Tanya Kumari are liable under Section 66(c) of the IT Act, 2000 for identity theft. They hacked the server of an e-hospital system and used the unique identity of the e-hospital to send verification requests to the UIDAI database for their own app, constituting fraudulent use of unique identification features. Section 66C punishes this crime with up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of up to 1 lakh rupees. The section does not define "unique identification features," which covers a vast and future-oriented range of identifying information.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    It Act, 2000

    Uploaded by

    Rakshit Taneja
    18 views1 page
    Both Aman Srivastava and Tanya Kumari are liable under Section 66(c) of the IT Act, 2000 for identity theft. They hacked the server of an e-hospital system and used the unique identity of the e-hospital to send verification requests to the UIDAI database for their own app, constituting fraudulent use of unique identification features. Section 66C punishes this crime with up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of up to 1 lakh rupees. The section does not define "unique identification features," which covers a vast and future-oriented range of identifying information.

    Original Description:

    very helpful

    Original Title

    New Microsoft Office Word Document

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Both Aman Srivastava and Tanya Kumari are liable under Section 66(c) of the IT Act, 2000 for identity theft. They hacked the server of an e-hospital system and used the unique identity of the e-hospital to send verification requests to the UIDAI database for their own app, constituting fraudulent use of unique identification features. Section 66C punishes this crime with up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of up to 1 lakh rupees. The section does not define "unique identification features," which covers a vast and future-oriented range of identifying information.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    18 views1 page

    It Act, 2000

    Uploaded by

    Rakshit Taneja
    Both Aman Srivastava and Tanya Kumari are liable under Section 66(c) of the IT Act, 2000 for identity theft. They hacked the server of an e-hospital system and used the unique identity of the e-hospital to send verification requests to the UIDAI database for their own app, constituting fraudulent use of unique identification features. Section 66C punishes this crime with up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of up to 1 lakh rupees. The section does not define "unique identification features," which covers a vast and future-oriented range of identifying information.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    That Both Of Them Liable For The Identity Theft Under Section 66c of It Act,2000

    It is humbly submitted that both of them are liable under the identity theft under the Section
    66(c).1 Whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly make use of unique identification feature of any
    other person, 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 rupees one lakh. In this
    case both of them AmanSrivastava and Tanya Kumari uses the unique identity of the e hospital
    by hacking the server of ehospital system and send verification requests to the UIDAI database
    for their own app.in a case, a person get arrested for hacking the whats app account of people
    and uses there identity2. It was already proved that both of them has fraudulent intention.

    That they use of unique identity feature.

    It is pertinent to point out that section 66C does not give the definition of the term unique
    identification features. These words are very vast, comprehensive and frturistic in their approach
    and prospective.

    1
    It Act,2000
    2
    http://indianexpress.com/article/india/college-student-arrested-for-hacking-whatsapp-accounts-4733762/

    You might also like