Cheating by Personation, and Violation of Privacy

In one line

Section 66D punishes cheating by personation using a computer, and section 66E punishes capturing, publishing or transmitting the image of a private area without consent, and the second is far more tightly drafted than the first.

Section 66D

66D. 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.

The section borrows both its concepts.

"Cheats" is defined in section 318(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, formerly section 415 of the Penal Code: whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property or to consent that any person shall retain property, or intentionally induces the person deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property.

"By personation" is defined in section 319(1): a person cheats by personation if he cheats by pretending to be some other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for another, or representing that he or any other person is a person other than he really is. And the Explanation is the one to remember: the offence is committed whether the individual personated is a real or imaginary person.

So section 66D requires four things: deception; personation, real or imaginary; the inducement and damage or harm that section 318 requires; and that it be done by means of a communication device or computer resource.

And note the sentencing anomaly. Section 66D carries three years. Section 319(2) of the Sanhita, cheating by personation without any computer, carries five years. The special provision is lighter than the general one, which is the opposite of what students expect, and a prosecutor with a serious case will charge both.

What section 66D reaches

Phishing. An email or page pretending to be a bank, inducing the victim to part with credentials, and thereby with money. This is the paradigm case and section 66D is the provision the police charge.

Vishing and smishing, the same by telephone call or text message, since a cell phone is a communication device under section 2(1)(ha).

Fake profiles used to obtain money, including matrimonial and investment frauds, because the Explanation to section 319 covers an imaginary person.

Impersonating an official, a customer service representative or a courier company.

And what it does not reach. A fake profile used to harass but not to cheat, because there is no inducement causing damage or harm of the kind section 318 requires. That conduct is charged under section 79 of the Sanhita where it insults the modesty of a woman, under section 356 for defamation, or under section 78 for stalking. Chapter 1380.