Section 84B

Section 84B fills an important gap in the IT Act's criminal framework: without it, a person who instigates, aids, or conspires in a cyber offence could argue they are not directly liable under the specific offence provision. By making abetment punishable with the same penalty as the principal offence, Section 84B ensures that the architect of a cyber attack is as culpable as the person who executes it. The provision imports the concept of abetment from the Indian Penal Code (now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) — which defines abetment to include instigation, conspiracy, and intentional aid. Common applications: a person who provides hacking tools or credentials used by another to breach a system; a manager who instructs an employee to delete company data in violation of Section 65; an organiser of a cyber fraud ring who does not personally operate the technical infrastructure; and someone who helps another plan and execute a phishing campaign under Sections 66C-66D. The qualification 'if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment' is important — abetment liability under Section 84B attaches only if the principal offence is actually carried out. Attempted abetment where the principal offence does not occur may be pursued under Section 84C (attempt) or under BNS abetment provisions instead.