Recalibrating Digital Jurisprudence: Legislative and Judicial Trajectories of Information Technology Law in India in 2022

Patel, S. A. (2023). Recalibrating Digital Jurisprudence: Legislative and Judicial Trajectories of Information Technology Law in India in 2022. https://doi.org/10.26643/jsmap/2023/12/1

Sajid A. Patel

Assistant Professor in Mercantile Law,

D.A.V. Velankar College of Commerce, Solapur

sajid123490@gmail.com

Abstract

The intersection of information technology and law in India has become increasingly significant in the wake of rapid digitalization. The year 2022 marked a critical juncture, with legislative amendments, judicial innovations, and policy debates shaping the contours of India’s digital governance framework. This paper examines the evolution of law relating to Information and Technology in India during in the form of an amendment in 2022, focusing on statutory amendments, judicial responses, and emerging challenges in cyber regulation.

Keywords: Digital Jurisprudence, Information Technology Law, Information Technology Act, 2000, Intermediary Liability, Data Protection, Digital Privacy, Cyber Governance.

Introduction

India’s legal framework has long struggled to strike an equilibrium between fostering technological progress and ensuring adequate regulatory safeguards. The Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) emerged as the foundational statute for governing cyberspace, yet the rapid proliferation of digital platforms, the exponential expansion of data exchanges, and the surge in online commercial activity soon revealed its limitations. These developments created an urgent need for reform to address new forms of cyber threats and digital complexities. In response, 2022 witnessed significant parliamentary initiatives aimed at fortifying provisions against cybercrime, while the judiciary simultaneously embraced digital tools and platforms to streamline processes, enhance accessibility, and improve overall efficiency in the administration of justice.

Background

India’s legal system has historically grappled with the delicate task of balancing technological innovation with regulatory safeguards, a tension that has only intensified in the digital age. The enactment of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) was a landmark moment, establishing the first comprehensive framework for addressing cybercrimes, electronic commerce, and digital authentication. Yet, the exponential growth of digital platforms, the proliferation of cross border data flows, and increased online transactions have exposed gaps in the original statute. The IT Act, conceived at the dawn of India’s internet revolution, was not designed to anticipate the complexities of artificial intelligence, algorithmic governance, or the challenges of protecting personal data in a globalized digital economy. By 2022, these pressures had reached a critical point. The Indian Parliament introduced amendments aimed at strengthening cybercrime provisions, expanding definitions to encompass emerging technologies, and enhancing penalties for offenses such as identity theft, online fraud, and child exploitation in cyberspace. These legislative efforts reflected a recognition that cyber threats were no longer confined to isolated incidents but had evolved into systemic risks capable of undermining national security, financial stability, and individual rights. At the same time, the judiciary began to rely more extensively on digital tools to enhance efficiency and accessibility. The Supreme Court and several High Courts institutionalized hybrid hearings, integrating virtual platforms into routine judicial practice. This digital transformation of the courts was not merely a response to pandemic exigencies but a structural innovation aimed at reducing backlog, democratizing access to justice, and aligning India’s judicial system with global trends in e-governance.

However, these developments also raised profound constitutional and policy questions. How should India reconcile the imperatives of cyber security with the fundamental right to privacy recognized in Justice K.A. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (AIR 2017 SC 4161); to what extent should regulatory frameworks impose obligations on intermediaries and digital platforms without stifling innovation?; and how can judicial reliance on technology avoid exacerbating the digital divide, particularly for marginalized communities with limited access to digital infrastructure? The year 2022 thus marked a pivotal juncture in India’s cyber law trajectory one in which legislative ambition and judicial innovation converged, but also revealed the enduring challenges of crafting a digital legal order that is both effective and equitable.

Legislative Developments in 2022

Information Technology Act, 2000 was amended in the year 2022 by Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2022 which came to be applied form 28^th October 2022 so as to include new provisions in following manner

Definition of Intermediary expanded (Section 2): – The scope of definition of “Intermediary” has been increased to include online gaming platforms and certain digital media services. By expanding the scope of definition, the law encompasses new categories of digital actors, ensuring they fall under the regulatory net.
Exemption from Liability of Intermediary (Section 79):- By new Amendment Act, 2022 intermediaries retain conditional immunity from liability, but only if they comply with due diligence obligations under the amended rules. Platforms must act on user complaints within strict timelines which is prescribed 24 hours for acknowledgement and 15 days to resolve the complaint. This amendment shifts the balance toward conditional responsibility, reinforcing accountability from broad immunity.
Grievance Redressal Mechanism (Section 79 (2) and Amendment Rules 2022):- For redressal of grievance relating to Intermediary under the Information Technology Act Grievance Officer is to be appointed by intermediary. Establishment of Grievance Appellate Committees under government oversight has also been prescribed. By virtue of this provision a quasi-judicial oversight structure under state authority upon private platform governance has been established.
Due Diligence Required (Section 79 (3)):- Now Platforms will have to proactively monitor unlawful content, publish compliance reports, and provide clear user complaint mechanisms. This provision is in tune with European Union’s Digital Services Act.
Cheating by Personation Using Computer Resources (Section 66 D):- By the Amendment Rules 2022 intermediary obligations has been extended to prevent impersonation and fraud in gaming environments.
Compensation for Failure to Protect Data (Section 43-A):- Intermediaries have been made responsible to compensate for their failure to protect the data.
Monitoring and Collection of Traffic Data (Section 69 B):-The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, authorize any agency to monitor and collect traffic data or information generated, transmitted, received, or stored in any computer resource. Any intermediary or person in charge of a computer resource must provide technical assistance and facilities to the authorized agency for online access or securing such data. The object of this provision is to enhance cyber security, identifying and preventing intrusions, and stopping the spread of computer contaminants.
Cyber Terrorism (Section 66 F):- This provision was proposed to criminalize acts of cyber terrorism, including unauthorized access to computer resources with intent to threaten national security or disrupt essential services. It broadened the scope beyond hacking to cover coordinated cyber-attacks on infrastructure.
Identity Theft and Fraudulent Digital Practices (Section 66 G):- The Amendment Act, 2022 prohibits identity theft in digital transactions, including misuse of biometric data, Aadhaar-linked services, and online banking credentials. It recognized the growing problem of impersonation in e-commerce and fintech platforms.
Protection of Children (Section 67 B):- The Amendment Act, 2022 prohibits publishing or transmitting sexually explicit material involving children. The amendment emphasized stricter penalties and expanded definitions to include grooming and online solicitation.
Emerging Digital Harm (Section 67 BA):- The Amendment Act, 2022 encompasses new categories of newly invented harmful online content, such as deep fakes, synthetic media, and digitally manipulated obscene material.

Reforms in Judicial and Institutional Developments

By virtue of Amendments made in the year 2022 judicial and institutional developments have been reformed.

Digitalization of Courts:- In 2022 the judiciary accelerated through e-filing, online cause lists, and virtual hearings. The Supreme Court institutionalized hybrid hearings, balancing physical and digital participation.
Online Dispute Resolution:- Particular types of disputes like Consumer disputes, small claims, and fintech-related grievances are increasingly moved to Online Dispute Resolution platforms, reducing backlog and improving efficiency.
Use of Artificial Intelligence in legal research:- A.I. tools and techniques have been started to be used to help courts and law man in solving the cases.

Challenges Ahead

The amendments allow government officials to order the removal of online content within very short periods, sometimes as little as two to three hours in urgent cases. This has raised worries that such broad powers, without proper judicial checks, could weaken fair legal procedures and constitutional protections.
Social media sites, messaging apps, and other online platforms are under heavy pressure to meet strict deadlines prescribed under the law. Smaller platforms especially struggle because they don’t have the technical systems needed to act so quickly, which makes compliance difficult and increases the chance of content being removed unfairly.
To avoid being penalized, online platforms often play it safe by removing content even when it’s unclear whether it is actually illegal. This can end up silencing genuine speech, discouraging people from freely expressing themselves, and weakening healthy democratic discussion.
When government officers issue a “reasoned intimation” to flag content, the process is not fully open or clear. People and platforms often don’t understand why certain content is targeted, and since there is no strong system for appeal or review, accountability becomes weak.
Words like “harmful,” “unlawful,” or “misinformation” are not clearly defined. Because of this vagueness, authorities have wide freedom in how they enforce the rules, which can be misused for political or ideological reasons.
The amendments raise important constitutional concerns under Article 19(1) (a), which protects freedom of speech and expression. Courts have earlier stressed that any restrictions must be necessary and proportionate, but these new rules may not fully meet those standards.
Online platforms must appoint grievance officers and quickly handle user complaints. But because there are so many complaints and no clear system to decide which ones should be addressed first, this becomes difficult, leading to inefficiency and chances of misuse.
Global online platforms working in India face conflicting rules between Indian law and international standards, such as Europe’s GDPR. This makes compliance complicated and could discourage investment and innovation in India’s digital sector.
Even after much discussion, a full Data Protection Act was not passed in 2022, which left personal data exposed and unprotected.
Concerns grew about the use of opaque algorithms in areas like fintech, hiring, and law enforcement, as they raised doubts about fairness and accountability.

Conclusion

The year 2022 marked a turning point in India’s information technology law and digital governance framework. On one hand, legislative amendments to the IT Act reflected the government’s intent to modernize outdated provisions and respond to the rapid growth of digital platforms. On the other, judicial institutions began embracing digitalization, signalling a broader transformation in how justice and governance interact with technology. These developments highlight India’s recognition of the digital sphere as central to its socio-economic future. Yet, despite these important steps, several challenges remain unresolved. The absence of a comprehensive Data Protection Act left personal data exposed, raising serious concerns about privacy and individual rights. Cyber security threats continued to evolve in complexity, testing the resilience of India’s digital infrastructure. At the same time, issues of equitable access persisted, with rural and marginalized communities often excluded from the benefits of digital transformation. The reliance on opaque algorithms in areas such as fintech, recruitment, and law enforcement further raised questions of fairness, accountability, and transparency. These gaps underscore the urgent need for a holistic, rights-based approach to digital governance. Future reforms must not only encourage innovation and technological growth but also embed constitutional safeguards to protect freedom of speech, privacy, and equality. A balanced framework is essential one that promotes efficiency and modernization while ensuring that democratic values are not compromised.

India’s digital journey is at a crossroads. The choices made in the coming years will determine whether technological progress serves only a privileged few or becomes a tool for inclusive and just development. By aligning innovation with constitutional principles, India can build a digital ecosystem that is secure, transparent, and accessible to all, thereby ensuring that its digital transformation strengthens democracy rather than undermines it.

References

Aishwarya Agrawal, How Technology is Changing Law in India, Law Bhoomi (2022).

Bar & Bench, Judicial Innovations in Virtual Hearings (2022).

Derek RSN, Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2023 – Definitions Expansion (2023).

Internet Freedom Foundation, Analysis of IT Rules and Amendments (2022).

Juned, Brief Summary of Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2022 (2022).

Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology (MeitY), Cybersecurity Breach Reports (2022).

NITI Aayog, Responsible AI for All: Strategy Paper (2022).

Press Information Bureau, Cybercrime Against Women – IT Act Provisions (2022).

Supreme Court of India, Annual Report on E-Courts Project (2022).

Yadul Krishna, New Technology Laws Raise Old Concerns, Times of India (2022).

https://analyticsindiamag.com/ai-features/indias-new-it-act-amendments-reopen-an-unsettled-debate