Section 66D explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 punishes a person who cheats by personation by means of a communication device or computer resource. The printed punishment is imprisonment of either description up to three years, and the person is also liable to fine up to one lakh rupees. This article follows the consolidated text consulted (the Act as amended by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008); later amendments and the current position should be checked.
Section 66D applies to whoever cheats by personation using a communication device or computer resource. The printed punishment is imprisonment of either description up to three years, and liability to fine up to one lakh rupees. The section does not define "cheats" or "personation"; the words are printed without an Explanation.
What section 66D says
The copy prints: "Whoever, by means for 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."
One printing slip is visible: "by means for any communication device" where the sense is "by means of". We flag it and do not correct it.
The working parts are:
- A means. The act is done "by means" of a communication device or a computer resource. Section 2(1)(ha) defines "communication device" as cell phones, personal digital assistance or a combination of both, or any other device used to communicate, send or transmit any text, video, audio or image. Section 2(1)(k) defines "computer resource" as computer, computer system, computer network, data, computer database or software. Our article on section 2 of the IT Act explains both.
- Cheating by personation. The section uses the phrase without defining it, and no Explanation follows. The Act does not print the meaning of "cheats" or of "personation" in this section. The reader should not import meanings from the section 66 Explanation, which says it applies "for the purposes of this section", that is, section 66.
- Punishment. Imprisonment of either description up to three years, and also liable to fine up to one lakh rupees.
Businesses that deal with customers by phone, email or messaging should keep records of who authorised what, and advice on internal verification steps is better taken before an incident, while legal dispute resolution support fits once a complaint or notice has arrived.
Reading section 66D beside its neighbours
| Section | Core idea | Joined by | Printed maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| 66B | Dishonestly receiving or retaining a stolen computer resource or communication device | "or with both" | Three years; fine up to rupees one lakh |
| 66C | Fraudulent or dishonest use of another person's electronic signature, password or unique identification feature | "and shall also be liable" | Three years; fine up to rupees one lakh |
| 66D | Cheating by personation by means of a communication device or computer resource | "and shall also be liable" | Three years; fine up to one lakh rupees |
Section 66C looks at use of another's identifying item; section 66D looks at deceit by personation. Our articles on section 66C and section 66B set out the other two. A single set of facts can fall to be examined under more than one provision, and the text does not say which is chosen; that is for the complaint and the investigation.
The general provisions that surround it
These provisions apply across the offences of Chapter XI, stated as printed.
- Section 77A. A Court of competent jurisdiction may compound offences "other than offences for which the punishment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding three years has been provided", with two provisos: not where the accused, by reason of previous conviction, is liable to enhanced punishment or a punishment of a different kind; and not where the offence affects the socio economic conditions of the country or has been committed against a child below the age of 18 years or a woman. Under sub-section (2) the accused may file an application in the Court where the offence is pending, and "sections 265-B and 265-C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)" apply.
- Section 77B. "Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the offence punishable with imprisonment of three years and above shall be cognizable and the offence punishable with imprisonment of three years shall be bailable." The section is numbered "(1)" with no sub-section (2). We quote it and classify nothing beyond those words. Our article on sections 77A and 77B discusses them.
- Section 78. A police officer not below the rank of shall investigate any offence under the Act.
- Section 84B. Abetment is punished with the punishment provided for the offence under the Act when the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment and no express provision is made. The Explanation says an act or offence is committed in consequence of abetment when it is committed in consequence of the instigation, in pursuance of the conspiracy, or with the aid which constitutes the abetment.
- Section 84C. Attempt, where no express provision is made, is punished with imprisonment up to "one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence", or fine as provided, or both.
- Section 85. Where the contravention is by a company, persons in charge and responsible to the company, and the company, are liable, with a proviso for want of knowledge or due diligence; sub-section (2) reaches a director, manager, secretary or other officer in case of consent, connivance or neglect.
The Act refers to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; check the current procedural law for the corresponding provisions.
A worked example
Sunita Rao, an invented bookkeeper at a trading firm, receives a message on her phone from a number saved as "Accounts Head" asking her to transfer a supplier payment to a new account. The sender is not the accounts head. Sunita transfers the amount and the firm loses it.
On those facts, a reader would examine: was a communication device or computer resource used (the messaging account and phone are), did the sender cheat by personation (the sender passed himself off as the accounts head), and what punishment is printed (up to three years and liability to fine up to one lakh rupees). The section does not say that the amount lost must reach any figure. Separately, the firm should review its authorisation checks; the Act does not prescribe any.
Need help with a personation complaint?
If your business has lost money to a message or call from someone posing as a known person, or you have been named in a complaint about personation, our team can review the facts and the next steps. Contact us through legal dispute resolution.
Key takeaways
- Section 66D covers cheating by personation by means of a communication device or computer resource.
- Printed punishment: imprisonment of either description up to three years, and also liable to fine up to one lakh rupees.
- The section prints no definition of "cheats" or "personation"; one printing slip ("by means for any") is flagged, not corrected.
- Sections 77A, 77B, 78, 84B, 84C and 85 apply as printed; check the current procedural law.
Read next
- Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000: punishment for identity theft
- Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000: punishment for violation of privacy
- Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000: computer related offences
- IT Act 2000 and Cybercrimes in India: key provisions, offences and amendments
Disclaimer: Based on a consolidated copy of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as amended by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, on the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 as originally notified on 25 February 2021 and on the CERT-In Directions of 28 April 2022, read with the amendments made to the Act by the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 and by section 44 of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, as consulted on 2 October 2026. Commencement notifications, other amendments, rules, directions and the current position of each provision are not covered and should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.