Why is it in the News?
- Government data shows a sharp rise in cybercrimes, especially fake job offers, online investment frauds, social media impersonation, and deepfake-related scams.
- Karnataka accounted for over 70% of Section 66D cases in 2023, drawing attention to regional patterns and enforcement challenges.
- Low charge-sheeting and conviction rates highlight systemic weaknesses in investigation and legal processes, making it a governance and law enforcement concern.
Relevance:
- GS 2 – Governance & Polity
- Law enforcement challenges, IT Act (Section 66D), low charge-sheeting and conviction rates.
- Need for governance reforms, judicial preparedness, and policy interventions.
- GS 3 – Security & Technology
- Cybersecurity, digital forensics, deepfake detection, online fraud mitigation.
Basic Concepts
Cybercrime under Section 66D, IT Act 2000
- Defines offences of cheating by personation using computer resources.
- Punishment: Up to 3 years imprisonment and ₹1 lakh fine.
Charge-sheeting & Conviction Rate
- Charge-sheeting rate: Percentage of cases where formal charges are filed.
- Conviction rate: Percentage of trials ending in guilty verdicts.
- Both metrics indicate the effectiveness of investigation and prosecution.
Key Findings
| Aspect | Observation |
| National Cybercrime Trend | Cases rose from 53,000 (2021) → 66,000 (2022) → 86,400 (2023) |
| Karnataka’s Share | >25% pre-pandemic in 2019, dipped during 2020–2022, surged in 2023 (>70% of 66D cases) |
| Section 66D Trend | National share: 12% (2019) → 29% (2023); Karnataka: 8.5% (2019) → 83% (2023) |
| Charge-sheeting Rate (66D, 2023) | 25% nationally; below cybercrime average of 33.9% |
| Conviction Rate (66D, 2023) | 33% nationally; slightly above overall cybercrime rate of 27.6% |
| Notable Cases | – Viral deepfake of actress Rashmika Mandanna (2023) – Person posing as TRAI official cheats Finance Dept officer (Karnataka) – Forged NHM job selection list circulated in Kashmir |
| Enforcement Factors | Karnataka: first state with dedicated city-level cybercrime police stations (2017); proactive recording & trained personnel may increase reported numbers |
Implications
Governance & Law Enforcement
- Low charge-sheeting and conviction rates indicate gaps in investigation, evidence handling, and cyber-legal preparedness.
- Need for digitally trained investigators, prosecutors, and judges.
Public Awareness & Safety
- Fake jobs, impersonation scams, and deepfakes threaten financial security and reputations.
- Citizens need awareness of digital hygiene and verification mechanisms.
Policy Recommendations
- Specialized cybercrime training modules for police and judiciary.
- Improved digital forensics infrastructure.
- Encourage public-private partnerships for cyber threat detection and prevention.
Quick Revision
- Section 66D, IT Act 2000: Cheating by personation using computer resource; Punishment: ≤3 years, ₹1 lakh fine.
- Karnataka 2023: 70%+ of Section 66D cases in India.
- Charge-sheeting rate (66D, India, 2023): 25%; Conviction rate: 33%.
- Rising Trends: Deepfakes, social media impersonation, fake jobs, online investment frauds.
- Governance Gap: Investigation & judicial system require cyber-digital specialization.
