Fraudulent publication of electronic signature certificates is criminalised where a person knowingly creates, publishes, or otherwise makes an electronic signature certificate available for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose. The offence is punishable with imprisonment, fine, or both.

Section 73 prohibits knowingly publishing or making an electronic signature Certificate available where the named Certifying Authority did not issue it, the named subscriber did not accept it, or it has been revoked or suspended. Publication solely to verify an electronic signature created before suspension or revocation is permitted. Contravention is punishable with imprisonment up to two years, a fine up to one lakh rupees, or both.

Confidentiality and privacy protection imposes a monetary penalty of up to five lakh rupees where a person, while exercising powers under the Information Technology Act, 2000, or its rules or regulations, obtains access to electronic records, information, documents, or other material and discloses it to another person without the concerned person's consent.

Misrepresentation or suppression of material facts to the Controller or a Certifying Authority for obtaining a licence or electronic signature Certificate is punishable with imprisonment up to two years, a fine up to one lakh rupees, or both.

Section 70 permits the appropriate Government to notify a computer resource affecting Critical Information Infrastructure as a protected system. Access may be granted only to persons authorised by written order. Securing or attempting to secure access contrary to these requirements is punishable with imprisonment extending to ten years and fine. The Central Government must prescribe information security practices and procedures for protected systems.

Section 69 authorises interception, monitoring, or decryption of information through computer resources where necessary or expedient for specified public interests or offence investigation. Directions require recorded written reasons and remain subject to prescribed procedures and safeguards. Subscribers, intermediaries, and persons in charge of computer resources must provide access, technical assistance, or stored information when required. Failure to assist attracts imprisonment and fine.

Controller may direct a Certifying Authority or its employee to take specified measures or discontinue activities necessary to secure compliance with information technology law, rules, or regulations. Intentional or knowing non-compliance with such direction constitutes an offence and attracts a monetary penalty up to the prescribed limit.

Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises publishing, transmitting, or causing the publication or transmission of obscene material in electronic form. The prohibition applies to material that is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, or tends to deprave and corrupt likely readers, viewers, or listeners. It prescribes imprisonment and fine for a first conviction, with enhanced penalties for repeat convictions.

Section 66 criminalises conduct where a person dishonestly or fraudulently commits any act covered by section 43. The offence is punishable by imprisonment, fine, or both. The terms "dishonestly" and "fraudulently" carry the meanings assigned under the Indian Penal Code.

Knowingly or intentionally concealing, destroying, altering, or causing alteration of computer source code required by law to be maintained constitutes an offence. The prohibition covers source code used for a computer, computer programme, computer system, or computer network. Computer source code includes programme listings, computer commands, design and layout, and programme analysis of a computer resource. The offence is punishable with imprisonment, fine, or both.

Unpaid penalty or compensation under the Information Technology Act, 2000 is recoverable as an arrear of land revenue. The relevant licence or electronic signature certificate remains suspended until payment of the penalty.

Contraventions under the Information Technology Act, 2000 may be compounded before or after adjudication by the Controller, a specially authorised officer, or the adjudicating officer, subject to specified conditions. The compounding amount cannot exceed the maximum applicable penalty. Repeat or similar contraventions within three years of an earlier compounded contravention cannot be compounded, while later contraventions are treated as first contraventions. Compounding precludes further proceedings for the same contravention.

Section 62 permits a person aggrieved by an Appellate Tribunal decision or order to appeal to the High Court on any question of fact or law arising from that order. The appeal must be filed within sixty days of communication. Where sufficient cause prevented timely filing, the High Court may allow a further period not exceeding sixty days.

Section 61 bars civil courts from entertaining suits or proceedings concerning matters that an adjudicating officer or Appellate Tribunal is empowered to determine under the statutory framework. It also prohibits courts or other authorities from granting injunctions against action taken, or proposed to be taken, pursuant to powers conferred under that framework.

Limitation for appeals made to the Appellate Tribunal is governed, as far as may be, by the Limitation Act, 1963. Its applicable provisions apply to the Tribunal's appellate process insofar as they can operate in relation to an appeal before the Tribunal.

Section 59 establishes an appellant's right to legal representation before the Appellate Tribunal. An appellant may appear personally or authorise one or more legal practitioners or its officers to present the case. Legal or officer representation is available as an alternative to personal appearance for presenting the case before the tribunal.

The Appellate Tribunal follows natural justice rather than Civil Procedure Code procedure and may regulate its procedure and sittings. It exercises civil-court powers to compel attendance, obtain documents or electronic records, receive affidavits, issue commissions, review decisions, and dismiss applications for default or decide them ex parte. Its proceedings have judicial-proceeding status, and it is deemed a civil court for specified criminal-procedure purposes.

Section 57 provides an appellate remedy before the Appellate Tribunal against orders of the Controller or an adjudicating officer, except consent orders. Appeals must be filed within forty-five days of receiving the order, subject to condonation of delay for sufficient cause. After hearing the parties, the Appellate Tribunal may confirm, modify, or set aside the challenged order and must communicate its order to the parties and concerned officer. Appeals are to be dealt with expeditiously, with an endeavour for final disposal within six months.

Section 56 was omitted, removing the statutory framework for Central Government provision of officers and employees to the Cyber Appellate Tribunal. Before omission, personnel performed functions under the Chairperson's general superintendence, while their salaries, allowances, and service conditions were prescribed by the Central Government. The provision had replaced the reference to Presiding Officer with Chairperson.

Section 55 confers finality on Central Government orders appointing the Chairperson or a Member of the Appellate Tribunal, barring such orders from being called in question. It also prevents acts or proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal from being challenged merely on the ground of a defect in the Tribunal's constitution.