Section 69: interception, monitoring and decryption
Section 69(1) allows the Central Government or a State Government, or any of its officers specially authorised for the purpose, where satisfied that it is necessary or expedient in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order, or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to those matters, or for investigation of any offence, to direct by order any agency of the appropriate Government to intercept, monitor or decrypt, or cause to be intercepted, monitored or decrypted, any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource. The order is made for reasons to be recorded in writing.
The procedure and safeguards for interception, monitoring and decryption are to be prescribed under section 69(2). Section 69(3) obliges the subscriber, an intermediary or any person in charge of the computer resource, when called upon by the agency, to extend all facilities and technical assistance to provide access to the computer resource, to intercept, monitor or decrypt the information, or to provide information stored in it. A subscriber, intermediary or other person who fails to assist is punishable under section 69(4) with imprisonment up to seven years and fine.
Section 69A: blocking for access by the public
Section 69A(1) allows the Central Government, or an officer it specially authorises, where satisfied that it is necessary or expedient on the grounds of the sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order, or for preventing incitement to the commission of a cognizable offence relating to those, to direct by order, for reasons recorded in writing, any agency of the Government or an intermediary to block for access by the public any information generated, transmitted, received, stored or hosted in a computer resource. The grounds are the same as in section 69 except that investigation of any offence is not among them.
The procedure and safeguards are prescribed under section 69A(2), by the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009. An intermediary that fails to comply with a direction is punishable under section 69A(3) with imprisonment up to seven years and fine.
In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, [2015] 5 S.C.R. 963, the Supreme Court held section 69A and the 2009 Rules constitutionally valid. The Court contrasted the section with section 66A, which it struck down, calling section 69A a narrowly drawn provision with several safeguards. Blocking can be resorted to only where the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary. The necessity must be related to some of the subjects in Article 19(2) of the Constitution. And reasons have to be recorded in writing in the blocking order so that it may be assailed in a writ petition under Article 226. The Court also noted that the Rules provide for a hearing before a committee and that, where the originator is identified, the originator is to be heard before a blocking order is passed. The judgment is summarised on the page on cyber law cases.
Section 69B: traffic data and cyber security
Section 69B(1) allows the Central Government, to enhance cyber security and for identification, analysis and prevention of intrusion or the spread of a computer contaminant in the country, to authorise by notification in the Official Gazette any agency of the Government to monitor and collect traffic data or information generated, transmitted, received or stored in a computer resource. An intermediary or a person in charge of the computer resource must, when called upon by that agency, provide technical assistance and extend all facilities to enable online access to the resource, and an intermediary that intentionally or knowingly contravenes this is punishable under section 69B(4) with imprisonment up to one year, or fine up to Rs 1 crore, or both. Before the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 took effect for this Act on 30 November 2023, the penalty was imprisonment up to three years and fine. Traffic data is data identifying or purporting to identify a person, computer system, network or location from which a communication is or may be transmitted, and includes its origin, destination, route, time, size, duration and type of service. The purpose is cyber security, and it is distinct from the interception power in section 69.
Four powers side by side, with section 79(3)(b)
The table puts the three sections with section 79(3)(b), which is the provision under which an intermediary loses its protection if it fails to act on actual knowledge. Notices by the Government to intermediaries under section 79(3)(b) are sent through the Sahyog portal, which the Ministry of Home Affairs said in a Lok Sabha reply of 2 December 2025 was launched to expedite the process.
| Provision | What it does | Who acts | Grounds | Consequence of non-compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Section 69 | Intercept, monitor or decrypt information in a computer resource | The Central Government or a State Government, or an officer specially authorised by it | Sovereignty or integrity of India, defence, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preventing incitement to a related cognizable offence, or investigation of any offence | Imprisonment up to seven years and fine, for a subscriber, intermediary or person who fails to assist |
| Section 69A | Block information for access by the public | The Central Government or an officer specially authorised by it | The same grounds, except investigation of any offence | Imprisonment up to seven years and fine, for an intermediary that fails to comply |
| Section 69B | Monitor and collect traffic data for cyber security | The Central Government, through an agency it authorises by notification | To enhance cyber security and identify, analyse and prevent intrusion or the spread of computer contaminants | Imprisonment up to one year, or fine up to Rs 1 crore, or both, for an intermediary that intentionally or knowingly fails to assist |
| Section 79(3)(b) | Remove or disable access to material on actual knowledge or notification | A court, or the appropriate Government or its agency | That the material is being used to commit an unlawful act | Loss of the intermediary’s protection from liability |
The relation between section 69A and section 79(3)(b) is that blocking under section 69A is a direction to the intermediary, with the reasons recorded and the 2009 Rules’ procedure, while section 79(3)(b) concerns the conditions on which the intermediary keeps its protection. The Supreme Court read down section 79(3)(b) in the same judgment to mean that actual knowledge is a court order or a notification by the appropriate Government that relates to the subjects in Article 19(2). The IT Rules 2021 apply that reading in rule 3(1)(d), which is described on the page on the IT Rules 2021. Rule 4(2) of those Rules also refers to orders passed under section 69 for identifying the first originator of information on messaging services.
Frequently asked questions
What does section 69 of the IT Act allow?
It lets the Central Government or a State Government, or an officer specially authorised by it, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient, to direct an agency to intercept, monitor or decrypt any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in a computer resource. The grounds include the sovereignty or integrity of India, defence, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preventing incitement to a related cognizable offence, and the investigation of any offence. The reasons must be recorded in writing.
What is the difference between section 69 and section 69A?
Section 69 is about intercepting, monitoring or decrypting information, and it includes investigation of any offence as a ground. Section 69A is about blocking information for access by the public, and it does not include investigation of any offence among its grounds. Both require reasons to be recorded in writing and both are subject to procedure and safeguards that are prescribed.
What is the penalty for not helping an agency under section 69?
Under section 69(4) a subscriber, intermediary or other person who fails to assist the agency, when called upon to extend facilities and technical assistance, is punishable with imprisonment up to seven years and is also liable to fine.
Did the Supreme Court uphold section 69A?
Yes. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, [2015] 5 S.C.R. 963, the Court held section 69A and the blocking Rules of 2009 constitutionally valid. It described the section as narrowly drawn with several safeguards: the Government must be satisfied that blocking is necessary, the necessity must relate to the subjects in Article 19(2), and reasons must be recorded in writing so that the order can be challenged in a writ petition under Article 226.
Does an ordinary person have to go through section 69A to get content removed?
No. A user who wants content removed can complain to the platform’s Grievance Officer under the IT Rules 2021, and, for intimate images or impersonation, expects action within two hours of the complaint. Section 69A is a power of the Government to order blocking, and not a route that a private person can invoke.