Section72
The Information Technology Act, 2000

Penalty for Breach of confidentiality and privacy

In force From 17 Oct 2000 Act 21 of 2000 As on 16 Oct 2026

Act 21 of 2000 Ministry Electronics and Information Technology Enacted 09 Jun 2000 In force 17 Oct 2000

Section 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with penalty for Breach of confidentiality and privacy. Save as otherwise provided in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, if any person who, in pursuance of any of the powers conferred under this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder, has secured access to any electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document The Act came into force on 17 Oct 2000.

Save as otherwise provided in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, if any person who, in pursuance of any of the powers conferred under this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder, has secured access to any electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material without the consent of the person concerned discloses such electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material to any other person shall be 1[liable to penalty which may extend to five lakh rupees[.

Section 72, The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Act 21 of 2000).

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

  1. N. Suresh v. R. Ahalya

    High Court 25 Nov 2021 Persuasive (High Court) Reportable Crl.P. 7442/2017 (Karnataka HC) Final Order 25.11.2021

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    Final Order order-1.pdf body dated 25 Nov 2021 (M. Nagaprasanna J.). Cache DATE-CHECK FP on marriage fact date 31.08.2014; body signature/header matches 2021-11-25 index. Quashes 66C/72 FIR: producing spouse salary slip from shared family ITR portal in DV defence is not IT Act s.72 breach of confidentiality/privacy.

    On this section: s.72 breach of confidentiality and privacy — producing spouse salary slip from shared family ITR portal in DV defence is not s.72 disclosure.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.

Questions about Section 72

What have the courts held on Section 72 of the Information Technology Act?

N. Suresh v. R. Ahalya (25 Nov 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.72 breach of confidentiality and privacy — producing spouse salary slip from shared family ITR portal in DV defence is not s.72 disclosure.

How do I find court cases under Section 72 of the Information Technology Act?

In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IT Act 72, section 72 IT Act, section 72 of the Information Technology Act. People searching for it also type it act 72a and it act 72 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with N. Suresh v. R. Ahalya (25 Nov 2021).

When did Section 72 of the Information Technology Act come into force?

Section 72 of the Information Technology Act, cited as IT Act 72, came into force on 17 Oct 2000, having been enacted on 09 Jun 2000. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.

Other sections of this Act

Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 16 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.