Ctrl+alt+deceive: The Growing Threat Of Online Identity Theft In India
Introduction India is undergoing a rapid digital transformation, with more and more people accessing the internet for various purposes, such as banking, shopping, socializing, and entertainment. However, this also exposes them to new risks and challenges, especially in the realm of online identity theft. This is a type of cybercrime where a hacker gets hold of personal information from unsuspecting users and misuses it for illegal activities, such as cloning credit cards, applying for loans, extorting money, or pretending to be the user online. Online identity theft is a widespread issue that affects millions of people in India. It involves obtaining personal information from users through different techniques, such as phishing, hacking, or malware. The hacker can then use the information for malicious purposes, such as accessing bank accounts, applying for loans, or impersonating someone else. Statistics and Trends This scenario is not far-fetched, as online identity theft is a widespread and growing problem in India. According to recent reports, India has a high prevalence of online identity theft cases. In 2022, India ranked first among researched countries worldwide by the number of identity theft cases with an estimated 27.2 million adults affected. This shows the need for more awareness and protection measures to prevent online identity theft in India. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports, there were 4,071 cases of identity theft (section 66C of IT Act) and 11,422 cases of cheating by personation using a computer resource (section 66D of IT Act) in India in 2021. The data also indicates a decline in identity theft and cheating cases compared to 2020, but a significant increase in fraud cases, highlighting the need for attention to address the high crime rate related to fraud in India. The NCRB data further showed a 24.4% increase in cybercrime in India in 2022, with fraud, extortion, and sexual exploitation being the top motives. Cyber fraud constituted the majority of cases (64.8%), followed by extortion (5.5%) and sexual exploitation (5.2%). A study by an IIT Kanpur-incubated start-up revealed that financial frauds accounted for over 75% of cybercrimes in India from January 2020 to June 2023, with nearly 50% of the cases related to UPI and internet banking. The study also highlighted that social media-related crimes accounted for 12% of the online offences during the same period. Legal Consequences of Online Identity Theft in India Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000, deals with the punishment for identity theft. The section states “whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly makes use of the electronic signature, password, or any other unique identification feature of any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years. This section aims to protect individuals from unauthorized use of their electronic signatures, passwords, or other unique identification features. According to this provision, offenders can face imprisonment for up to three years and fines of up to Rs. 1,00,000 (Rupees one lac). Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, deals with the punishment for cheating by personation using a computer resource. The section states that whoever, by means of 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 In addition to these sections, the Indian Penal Code introduces Section 419, penalizing cheating by personation. Those engaging in actions such as assuming another person’s identity, knowingly substituting one person for another, or falsely representing themselves or others may face imprisonment for up to three years, fines, or both. This provision is slated to be replaced by Section 319 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, defining the offense of cheating by personation. In cases of identity theft, Sections 463 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, addressing forgery and “forgery for the purpose of cheating,” may also be relevant. Section 468 prescribes imprisonment for up to seven years and a fine for forgery with the intent to cheat, while Section 463 defines forgery as creating a false document to cause harm, injury, support a claim, induce property exchange, enter into a contract, or commit fraud. Sections 463 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code have been substituted with Section 336 and Section 336(3), respectively, under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Section 420 of the IPC specifically addresses cheating, indicating that those inducing someone to deliver property, alter or destroy a valuable security, or anything convertible into a valuable security may face imprisonment for up to seven years and fines. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, replaces this provision with Section 316, addressing Criminal breach of trust under the same legal framework. The key distinction between the IPC and the IT Act concerning identity theft lies in the IT Act’s requirement for the offense to involve the assistance of a computer resource, with no maximum cap on fines imposed by the IPC. On August 12, 2023, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, came into force, receiving the President’s assent on August 11, 2023. Expected to aid in reducing data-related cybercrimes, including identity theft, this Act applies to digital personal data collected in both digital and non-digital forms. Rise of Deepfakes The surge in deepfakes and artificial intelligence has worsened the problem of digital identity theft. It’s now easier than ever to manipulate people’s voices, faces, and identities. Malicious individuals have taken advantage of this, using deepfakes to scam innocent people. For instance, a man from Kerala was tricked out of Rs 40,000 through an AI-based deepfake. Since deepfakes have only recently become a significant issue, there hasn’t been much legislation addressing the problem. However, this is likely to change soon. As deepfake technology continues to improve and become more realistic, it’s inevitable that regulations and strict measures will be necessary to prevent its abuse. This is crucial to safeguard people from potential harm. Protect Yourself from Online Identity Theft? Creating strong and unique passwords is paramount in safeguarding your online identity. Avoid using easily guessable
Understanding Suicide Attempt And Severe Stress Within The Framework Of The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017
Introduction: In this context, the continued classification of “attempt to commit suicide” as a crime under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of 1860 is seen as irrational. Section 309 of the IPC prescribes penalties for individuals who attempt to take their own lives or engage in acts that may lead to such an outcome. However, it is essential to recognize that the IPC was formulated in a different era when mental health was not a central concern. In the present, mental health issues are receiving increased attention, particularly due to the detrimental effects on mental health by the recent pandemic. In 2017, the government finally recognized the need for reform regarding Section 115 of the Mental Healthcare Act, marking a commendable acknowledgment that prosecuting and penalizing individuals already in distress is inhumane. However, rather than resolving the issue, Penal Code further complicates the matter. While Section 115 of the Act assumes the innocence of individuals attempting suicide and prohibits their prosecution and punishment, Section 309 of the IPC “Section 309. Attempt to commit suicide. – Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offence, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year 4 [or with fine, or with both.]” There is little justification for penalizing an individual who has chosen to end their own life, as this decision is often a result of severe mental suffering and not a rational choice. This research aims to analyse how the Indian judiciary has interpreted various landmark judgments related to Section 309 of Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes the attempt to commit suicide. Despite conflicting with the constitutional right to life (Article 21) and the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, this section continues to impose penalties on individuals attempting suicide. I. Attempt to Commit Suicide: 1. Definition and Historical Context: The act of attempting suicide has long been a complex and sensitive issue globally. The historical criminalization of suicide reflects societal attitudes that have evolved over time. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, marks a departure from this historical approach, seeking a more compassionate and understanding stance. 2. Legal Framework and Section 309 of IPC: Before delving into the Mental Healthcare Act’s provisions, it is essential to understand the legal landscape pre-2017. Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalized attempted suicide, subjecting individuals to potential legal consequences. The implications of this legal provision were far-reaching, affecting not only the legal system but also perpetuating societal stigma around mental health challenges. II. Severe Stress and the Mental Healthcare Act: 1. The Presumption of Severe Stress: Section 115(1) of the Mental Healthcare Act introduces a unique perspective on the mental state of individuals attempting suicide. It establishes a rebuttable presumption wherein an individual attempting suicide is presumed, unless proven otherwise, to be undergoing severe stress. This presumption is a pivotal aspect of understanding the person’s mental state and is specifically focused on the presence of severe stress. 2. Autonomy and Separation from Prosecution: Crucially, the Mental Healthcare Act’s language, particularly in Section 115(1), introduces an autonomous and self-contained framework. This framework involves two separate mandates, both commencing with the term ‘shall.’ The first mandate establishes the presumption of severe stress, while the second indicates the exemption from prosecution. These clauses operate independently from each other, with the crucial distinction that the exemption from prosecution does not rest upon the presumption of severe stress. III. Decriminalization and Legal Implications: 1. Significance of Autonomy: The autonomy established by the Mental Healthcare Act is pivotal in understanding the decriminalization of attempted suicide. By separating the presumption of severe stress from the exemption from prosecution, the Act emphasizes that individuals attempting suicide are exempt from legal consequences, irrespective of the confirmation or refutation of the presumption. 2. Legal Implications for Mental Health: The shift towards decriminalization has profound implications for mental health legislation and the broader legal landscape. It signifies a recognition of the need to prioritize mental health as a public health issue rather than a criminal one. This change aligns with global trends emphasizing the destigmatization of mental health challenges. IV. Challenges: 1. Ambiguity in Severe Stress Determination: While the Mental Healthcare Act takes significant strides in decriminalizing attempted suicide, challenges arise in determining and proving severe stress. The subjective nature of mental health assessments raises concerns about consistency and fairness in applying the presumption outlined in Section 115(1). 2. Societal Attitudes and Stigma: Despite legal advancements, societal attitudes towards mental health challenges remain a significant hurdle. Stigma associated with mental health issues can deter individuals from seeking help, perpetuating a culture of silence and hindering effective mental health interventions. Conclusion: In conclusion, the analysis of the current legal framework concerning attempted suicide in India exposes a range of significant problems, including the failure to address mental health concern adequately and the lack of respect for individual autonomy and the right to protest. While the call for the removal of Section 309 IPC is justifiable; it is clear that mere decriminalization falls short of addressing the law’s inherent ambiguities, notably those arising from Section 115 of the Mental Healthcare Act. To comprehensively address this issue, India should move beyond mere decriminalization and establish a national suicide prevention policy, acknowledging the complex factors contributing to suicidal behaviour and aiming to destigmatize mental illness while promoting help-seeking over self-harm. This approach is supported by international examples and the guidance of organizations like the World Health Organization,20 emphasizing the need for a holistic strategy to reduce suicide attempts. Key focus areas for India’s policy should include improved access to mental healthcare, mental health awareness among youth, collaboration with civil society groups, restricting access to suicide aids, and launching public campaigns promoting mental well-being. Ultimately, it is crucial to remove Section 309 IPC and Section 115(1) of the Mental Healthcare Act to create a more humane legal framework that considers mental health as a vital factor in leading a fulfilling life and not subjecting individuals to harsh punishment for their suffering. The emphasis should be on protection and
India And Maritime Law: A Simple Overview
The election manifesto accountability saga seems to be never-ending. A puzzle that the law can solve but lawmakers refrain from solving. Section 123 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, brings on record acts deemed corrupt practices. Still, the section is not exhaustive enough to include political parties for inducing citizens to vote by providing freebies in their election manifestos. The courts have held that election manifestos are not hit by promissory estoppel or the doctrine of legitimate expectations. In ANZ Grindlays Bank Pie Vs. Commissioner, MCD 1995 II AD (Delhi) 573, where dealing with an argument of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectations based on an election manifesto, it was held that the election manifesto of a political party, howsoever boldly and widely promulgated and publicized, can never constitute promissory estoppel or provide a foundation for legitimate expectations. The Supreme Court of India in S.Subramaniam Balaji vs. Government of Tamil Nadu (2013) 9 SCC 659 directed the ECI to frame guidelines for regulating election manifestos of political parties. Guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India were incorporated in Part VIII of the Model Code of Conduct. The ECI guidelines directed that the election manifesto shall not be against the ideals and principles of the Indian Constitution and shall be consistent with the spirit of the Model Code of Conduct. It further directed political parties to ensure the credibility of their manifesto to explain the rationale for their promises along with indicating the ways and means, and financial requirements to achieve the same. The Election Commission has further directed all political parties to send a copy of their election manifestos and a Hindi/English version (if the original version is in the regional language) whenever released, within three days of its release, for the Election Commission’s record. The political parties have also been requested to submit a declaration and a manifesto that the program/policies and promises made therein are in consonance with Part VIII of the Model Code of Conduct. Courts have consistently dismissed the legal enforceability of election manifestos. It is pertinent to point out the principle of caveat emptor (buyer beware). May the electorate beware.
Doing The Right Thing By Law
Introduction In the Indian legal system, the threads of justice are knitted with the principles of professional ethics. As members of the legal community, lawyers have a duty to respect not only the law but also the fundamental ethical principles that underpin their profession, such as telling the truth, treating everyone fairly, and protecting client privacy. These guidelines assist lawyers in doing their duties while ensuring that they are doing the right things in the correct way. Let’s examine these rules in more detail through The Advocates Act of 1961 which establishes professional conduct requirements for attorneys and also authorizes the Bar Council of India (BCI) to make regulations prescribing the professional behavior required of advocates practicing in India as well as Seven Lamps of Advocacy which serves as a informal guide for attorneys to preserve their ethical conduct in this noble profession. The Advocates Act, 1961 The Advocates Act of 1961 is a statute that consolidates and amends rules pertaining to legal practitioners in India. Section 29(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961 specifies the professional standards that advocates must follow under Chapter II, Part VI of the Bar Council of India. The Act specifies the obligations of advocates to the Court, Client, Opponents, and other advocates, as well as their rights which I have tried to condense those duties into a succinct but accurate summary here: Rules on Advocate’s Duty towards the Court Advocates must maintain self-respect and dignity while presenting their cases. If there are legitimate grievances against a judicial officer, they have the right and duty to report them to the proper authorities. Advocates must show respect towards the court, understanding that the dignity of the judicial office is crucial for a free society. Advocates cannot use illegal means to influence court decisions. Private communications with judges about ongoing cases are strictly prohibited. Advocates should discourage their clients from using unfair tactics in court. Advocates must follow the prescribed dress code when appearing in court Advocates cannot engage in legal matters where specified familial relationships exist between them, ensuring no bias Utilizing gowns or bands in public places outside court is prohibited. Advocates who hold positions in the executive committees of organizations are restricted from representing those entities in legal matters. Rules on Advocate’s Duty towards the Client Advocates must accept cases within their practice areas at a suitable fee. In specific circumstances, they may refuse a case. Once committed to a case, an advocate should not withdraw without a valid reason, providing adequate notice to the client. If they do withdraw, any unearned part of the fee should be refunded. Full disclosure of connections and interests affecting the case’s judgment should be made to the client. Advocates must defend their clients honorably and avoid fostering unnecessary litigation. Advocates are required to keep an account of the money the client has entrusted to them After a case, any remaining funds can contribute to the advocate’s fee. If fees are unsettled, they can deduct the appropriate fee and refund the balance to the client. Duties of an Advocate towards Fellow Advocates An Advocate must avoid publicizing his job through circulars, ads, and other means. The Signboard and Nameplate must be of fair size and contain no indication of the advocate being President or Member of a Bar Council or having been a judge or the advocate being a member of any affiliation If a colleague advocate has previously submitted a vakalatnama or note, the advocate shall not represent the same case unless the fellow advocate has approved. When a client can pay more, an advocate must not use his name to promote unauthorized practice of law and must not take a charge less than the amount. Duties of an Advocate towards opponents Prohibition of direct negotiation with the opposing party Fulfilling legitimate promises made[1] Seven Lamps Of Advocacy The book “Seven Lamps of Advocacy” coined by Judge Edward Abbot Parry outlines seven essential qualities for advocates: COURAGE – Advocacy demands bravery in facing courtroom battles and societal issues. WIT- for example: During a trial, an advocate encounters an unexpected legal loophole that weakens their case. Utilizing quick thinking and clever reasoning, the advocate can skillfully redirect the argument, turning a setback into an advantage INDUSTRY – Hard work and skill are crucial; ignorance of the law can be detrimental to both the advocate and their clients HONESTY- Integrity must underpin all actions, reflecting in work, conduct, and transparency with clients, earning trust and reliability FELLOWSHIP- Maintaining respect and camaraderie with fellow advocates is vital, fostering a positive attitude despite adversities. JUDGEMENT- Sound reasoning and anticipation are crucial for interpreting laws, strategizing arguments, and providing accurate legal counsel ELOQUENCE- Effective oratory skills, honed through practice and education, are essential for advocates to persuade judges and positively impact cases[2] Case laws that underscore the importance of maintaining professional ethics High stakes for advocates’ professional behavior Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of U.P.(2016) 8 SCC 335 Facts: The case involved Mahipal Singh Rana, an advocate, who faced allegations of contempt such as using foul language and inappropriate conduct on specific dates. The Allahabad High Court convicted Rana of contempt based on these allegations. Issues: Whether Rana could continue practicing as an advocate after the conviction and if there were any reason to overturn the High Court’s decision convicting Rana for contempt. Judgment: The Bar Council of India emphasized that even minor offenses by advocates could be considered moral turpitude, and advocates’ conduct should align with the profession’s high standards. The Supreme Court upheld Rana’s conviction and emphasized that in case of the Bar Council’s failure to act against misconduct, the Supreme Court can intervene under Section 38 of the Advocates Act. Rana’s enrollment as an advocate was suspended for 2 years under Section 24A, with an additional 5-year suspension of his license.[3] Withholding information violates the client’s right to know about the case. R.D. Saxena v. Balaram Prasad Sharma, AIR 2000 SC 2912 Facts: The appellant, an advocate and legal advisor
SEC 64 A Of NDPS Act, Pardoning Drug Users?
The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) defines drug possession as a crime. The severity of the punishment is determined by the amount of the substance, not by whether it was purchased or was in possession for personal use or was for sale. Section 27 of the NDPS Act defines drug consumption as a crime that carries a maximum of one year (for some drugs) or a six-month (for all other drugs) sentence upon conviction. The punishment for the crime under the NDPS Act is variable, ranging from a criminal being sent to a rehabilitation centre to jail for up to one year and a fine. Section 35 in The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 defines presumption of culpable mental state as, “In any prosecution for an offence under this Act which requires a culpable mental state of the accused, the court shall presume the existence of such mental state, but it shall be a defence for the accused to prove the fact that he had no such mental state with respect to the act charged as an offence in that prosecution.” In simpler words, a person apprehended under the NDPS Act is assumed to have knowledge, intent, and motive for the drug-related offence with which they are charged. Before the court, the accused must demonstrate that they do not have a “culpable mental state” to obtain bail. However, under section 64A of the Act, addicts who volunteer for treatment are exempted from prosecution. Anyone with a drug addiction who is accused of a crime punishable by Section 27 or a crime involving a minor amount of narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, who voluntarily seeks to undergo medical treatment for de-addiction from a hospital or an institution maintained or recognized by the Government or a local authority and undergoes such treatment, shall not be liable to prosecution under section 27. However, if the addict is found carrying drugs, say, for a party, and the total quantity of drugs exceeds a small quantity (https://dor.gov.in/narcoticdrugspsychotropic/punishment-offences ), then he cannot get immunity under section 64A. In the case of Sanjiv Bhatnagar vs State CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1278 OF 2015, the petitioner voluntarily submitted that he is willing to undergo Medical Treatment for de-addiction. The Madras High Court exercising its power under Section 482 of CrPC, ordered him to undergo treatment towards de-addiction and file a report. After evaluating the mental and physical health based on such a report, the court stated that “by applying Section 64(A) of the Act and the petitioner therein has gained immunity from prosecution; consequently proceedings before the II Additional Special Judge under NDPS Act, Chennai, have been quashed by the Madras High Court.” Anish Kumar Dundoo Versus State of Telangana Criminal Petition No. 1231 of 2021, where the High Court of Telangana, relying on the judgement rendered in the case of Sanjiv Bhatnagar vs State, quashed the proceedings against the petitioner stating the fact that the quantity which has been seized was small and the petitioner also produced a certificate of treatment issued by Government recognized De-Addiction centre. Simply put, Section 64(A) of the NDPS Act is intended to rid a user of drugs from the evil thereof and towards his/ her rehabilitation, the end object is to facilitate a life free of drugs.
Directions To Ensure That Police Officers Do Not Arrest Accused Unnecessarily And Magistrate Do Not Authorise Detention Casually And Mechanically
Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Anr, (2014) 8 SCC 273 [1] Background: Our endeavour in this judgement is to ensure that police officers do not arrest the accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorise detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction All State Governments instruct their police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, CrPC; All police officers be provided with a checklist containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii); The police officer shall forward the checklist duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention; The Magistrate, while authorising detention of the accused, shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid, and only after recording its satisfaction the Magistrate will authorise detention; The decision not to arrest an accused be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr. PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall, apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction. Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court. We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the IPC or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine. [1] (2014) 8 SCC 273
Guidelines For Testing Under What Circumstances A Live-in Relationship Will Fall Within The Expression “Relationship In The Nature Of Marriage” Under Section 2(F) Of The DV Act
Indra Sarma vs. V.K.V. Sarma, MANU/SC/1230/2013 [1] Background: The Supreme Court, in this case, was concerned with the question whether a “live-in relationship” would amount to a “relationship in the nature of marriage” falling within the definition of “domestic relationship” under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short “the DV Act”) and the disruption of such a relationship by failure to maintain a woman involved in such a relationship amounts to “domestic violence” within the meaning of Section 3 of the DV Act. GUIDELINES: The guidelines, of course, are not exhaustive but will definitely give some insight into such relationships. (1) Duration of period of relationship Section 2(f) of the DV Act has used the expression “at any point of time”, which means a reasonable period to maintain and continue a relationship that may vary from case to case, depending upon the situation. (2) Shared household Under Section 2(s) of the DV Act, the expression has been defined and, hence, needs no further elaboration. (3) Pooling of Resources and Financial Arrangements Supporting each other, or any one of them, financially, sharing bank accounts, acquiring immovable properties in joint names or the name of the woman, long-term investments in business, shares in separate and joint names, so as to have a long-standing relationship, may be a guiding factor. (4) Domestic Arrangements Entrusting the responsibility, especially to the woman, to run the home, and do the household activities like cleaning, cooking, maintaining or keeping the house, etc., is an indication of a relationship in the nature of marriage. (5) Sexual Relationship Marriage, like a relationship, refers to sexual relationships, not just for pleasure, but for emotional and intimate relationships, for procreation of children, to give emotional support, companionship and material affection, caring etc. (6) Children Having children is a strong indication of a relationship in the nature of marriage. Parties, therefore, intend to have a long-standing relationship. Sharing the responsibility for bringing up and supporting them is also a strong indication. (7) Socialisation in Public Holding out to the public and socialising with friends, relations and others as if they are husband and wife is a strong circumstance to hold the relationship in the nature of marriage. (8) Intention and conduct of the parties The common intention of parties as to what their relationship is to be and to involve, and as to their respective roles and responsibilities, primarily determines the nature of that relationship. [1] MANU/SC/1230/2013
Rights Of Disabled Person Under Indian Law
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, was enacted to give effect to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, which was ratified by India in the year 2007. The new Act, which repealed and replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunity Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, provides a more comprehensive set of rights, duties and safeguards for persons with disabilities in India. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 categorises three types of disabled persons as A person with benchmark disability- a person with not less than forty per cent of a specified disability where a specified disability has not been defined in measurable terms and includes a person with a disability where a specified disability has been defined in measurable terms, as certified by the certifying authority. (Section 2(r)) A person with a disability – long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in interaction with barriers, hinders his full and effective participation in society equally with others. (Section 2(s)) A person with a disability has high support needs- a benchmark disability certified under clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 58 who needs high support. (Section 2(t)) The Act ensures the protection and empowerment of disabled people by recognising and granting the rights: The right to equality, life with dignity and respect for his or her integrity equally with others, the right against discrimination on the grounds of disability and the right to personal Liberty. (Section 3) The right to live in the community. (Section 5) The right to not be subject to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and any research without his/her free and informed consent. (Section 6) The right against abuse, violence and exploitation. (Section 7) The right to equal protection and safety in situations of risk, armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and natural disasters. (Section 8) The right to reproduction against any medical procedure which leads a disabled person to infertility without his or her free and informed consent. (Section 10) The right to access any court, tribunal, authority, commission or any other body having judicial or quasi-judicial or investigative powers without discrimination based on disability in accordance with The National Legal Services Authority and the State Legal Services Authorities constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987). (Section 12) The right to own or inherit property, movable or immovable, control their financial affairs and have access to bank loans, mortgages and other forms of financial credit by promoting the right to equal recognition in all aspects of life, everywhere as any other person before the law. (Section 13) The right of persons with disabilities to have an adequate standard of living to enable them to live independently or in the community. The right to have a cultural life and participate in recreational activities equally. (Section 29) The right to free education for every child with a benchmark disability between the age of six to eighteen years in a neighbourhood school or a special school of his choice.(Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (35 of 2009) (Section 31) Not less than five per cent of seats are to be reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities and upper age relaxation of five years for admission in institutions of all government and other higher education. (Section 32) Punishment for Contravention of provisions mentioned above: Any person who violates provisions under the Act thereunder shall be punishable with a fine extending to ten thousand rupees and for any subsequent contravention with a fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but may extend to five lakh rupees. (Section 89) Any person who insults, voluntarily injures, assaults, dishonours, humiliates, or abuses any disabled persons shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term that shall not be less than six months but may extend to five years and with a fine. (Section 92)