BACK TO IT ACT
IT Act 2000

Section 81

Act to Have Overriding Effect

THE STATUTE

Original Text

The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. Provided that nothing contained in this Act shall restrict any person from exercising any right conferred under the Copyright Act, 1957 or the Patents Act, 1970.

Simplified

Section 81 contains the IT Act's non obstante clause — the legislative mechanism that establishes the IT Act's supremacy over other statutes in cases of inconsistency. 'Notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law' is the classic Indian legislative formulation that grants overriding status. Where a provision of the IT Act conflicts with a provision of any other central or state legislation, the IT Act provision prevails. In practice this has been relevant in: disputes between IT Act provisions on electronic evidence and older evidence statutes that presumed paper documents; conflicts between IT Act intermediary liability rules and defamation law under the IPC/BNS; and tension between IT Act data protection provisions and sector-specific regulations. The proviso carves out two important exceptions — the Copyright Act 1957 and the Patents Act 1970. This means Section 81 does not affect intellectual property rights: a person cannot use the IT Act to override copyright protections for digital content or patent rights in software inventions. This exception was important context for early debates about whether the IT Act's intermediary safe harbour under Section 79 could override copyright owners' rights to demand content removal — courts have interpreted Section 79 and copyright law as complementary rather than in conflict. Section 81 operates between statutes, not against constitutional rights — the Supreme Court's decision in Shreya Singhal confirmed that even the IT Act itself must be consistent with the Constitution.

Common Queries

Yes. Where the IT Act and the BNS (or IPC) conflict, the IT Act prevails. But in practice the Acts address different aspects of the same conduct — so both typically apply simultaneously rather than conflicting.
The carve-out reflects the legislature's commitment to maintaining strong intellectual property protection even within a digital framework — the IT Act's provisions on electronic records and intermediary liability cannot be used to circumvent copyright or patent rights.
The DPDP Act 2023 is a later statute — as between two statutes, the later prevails on matters of conflict under the general principle of leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant. The relationship between the IT Act and the DPDP Act is being worked out through the rulemaking process.

Legal Evolution

Section 81 was in the original IT Act 2000 and remains unchanged. The non obstante clause is standard for major reforming legislation in India — the Companies Act, SARFAESI Act, and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code all contain similar overriding provisions. The specific carve-out for Copyright and Patents Acts reflects the legislature's recognition that IP rights should not be inadvertently subordinated to the new cyber law framework.

Key Amendments

Unchanged from the original IT Act 2000.

Section 81A added by the 2008 Amendment dealing with electronic cheques — extends the Act's scope without modifying Section 81's overriding provision.

Landmark Precedents

Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)

(2015) 5 SCC 1
RELEVANCE

In striking down Section 66A, the Supreme Court confirmed that Section 81's overriding effect operates between statutes, not against constitutional rights — the IT Act itself must be consistent with the Constitution.