Section 66 IT Act: Hacking and Computer-Related Offences, Punishment and Bail

Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is the basic "hacking" offence in Indian cyber law. It appears in a large share of cyber crime FIRs, often alongside BNS sections on cheating or criminal breach of trust. The good news for anyone accused under it is that Section 66 by itself is a bailable offence. The Supreme Court confirmed this in July 2026.

What Section 66 says

Section 66 makes it an offence to do, dishonestly or fraudulently, any of the acts listed in Section 43 of the IT Act. Section 43 by itself is a civil provision that leads to compensation. Section 66 turns the same acts into a crime when they are done with a dishonest or fraudulent intention. The acts in Section 43 include:

• accessing a computer, computer system or network without the owner's permission;
• downloading, copying or extracting data without permission;
• introducing a virus or other computer contaminant;
• damaging a computer, network, data or programme;
• disrupting a computer system or denying access to an authorised user;
• destroying, deleting or altering information so as to reduce its value; and
• stealing, concealing or altering source code.

Punishment: imprisonment of up to three years, or a fine of up to ₹5 lakh, or both.

Common situations where Section 66 is invoked

• An employee who downloads client data or source code before leaving a company.
• Logging into someone else's email, social media or cloud account without permission.
• Business partners or ex-spouses accessing each other's devices or accounts after a dispute.
• Deleting or altering company records on the way out.
• Installing spyware or tracking apps on another person's phone.

Is Section 66 bailable?

Yes. Under Section 77B of the IT Act, an offence punishable with imprisonment of three years is bailable. In July 2026, in Maharaj Saran v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court set aside a High Court view that Section 66 was non-bailable. It held that the High Court had not taken Section 77B into account.

In practice this means:

• If the FIR is only under Section 66 (or other bailable sections), the accused is entitled to bail as of right, from the police station itself, on furnishing a bail bond.
• Section 66 is also compoundable under Section 77A of the IT Act, so a settlement with the complainant can end the case with the court's permission. The exceptions are offences against a woman or a child, or offences that affect the socio-economic conditions of the country.

When bail gets harder: added BNS sections

Police rarely register Section 66 on its own. It is often combined with:

• Section 318(4) BNS (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), punishable with up to seven years and non-bailable;
• Section 316 BNS (criminal breach of trust), common in employee data-theft cases;
• Section 61 BNS (criminal conspiracy); or
• in serious cases, Section 66F (cyber terrorism), which carries up to life imprisonment. See our post on Section 66F and bail.

Once a non-bailable section is added, bail is at the court's discretion. The strategy then depends on whether those added sections are actually made out on the facts.

How bail is sought when non-bailable sections are added

1. Notice instead of arrest (Section 35 BNSS)

For offences punishable with up to seven years, the police should ordinarily issue a notice of appearance rather than arrest, unless the conditions for arrest are met and recorded. This is the BNSS version of the safeguard the Supreme Court laid down in Arnesh Kumar and reinforced in Satender Kumar Antil. Complying with the notice and joining the investigation is often the first line of protection.

2. Anticipatory bail (Section 482 BNSS)

If arrest is apprehended, an application can be made to the Sessions Court or the High Court. Common grounds include:

• the dispute is essentially civil or commercial, such as an employment or partnership dispute;
• there was no dishonest or fraudulent intent, for example where access was authorised or data was the accused's own work;
• the devices and data are already seized or available, so custody is not needed; and
• willingness to join the investigation.

3. Regular bail (Sections 480 and 483 BNSS)

After arrest, offences punishable with up to seven years are triable by a Magistrate, and the Magistrate can grant bail. If refused, the Sessions Court can be approached. Courts also weigh the time already spent in custody and whether the chargesheet has been filed.

What not to do

• Do not delete data, reset devices or wipe accounts after a complaint. It can lead to further charges and hurts a bail application.
• Do not contact the complainant to "settle" without legal advice. Messages can be misread as threats.
• Do not hand over devices or passwords, or give a statement, without speaking to a lawyer first.

A note on Section 66A

Section 66A, which punished "offensive" online messages, was struck down by the Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015). No one can be prosecuted under it, and the Supreme Court has since directed that pending 66A cases be dropped. If an FIR still mentions Section 66A, that part is invalid.

Legal help in Gurugram

Rajat Kadyan and Associates handles cyber crime and bail matters before the District and Sessions Court, Gurugram, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court, including quashing of FIRs that turn civil disputes into criminal cases.

Phone: +91 82954 13475 · Email: contact@rajatkadyan.com

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts.