- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 225: Threat of Injury to Induce Person to Refrain from Applying for Protection to Public Servant
Introduction
Section 225 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) protects a person’s right to seek lawful protection from a competent public servant.
The section punishes a person who threatens another with injury in order to stop that person from making a lawful application for protection against injury to a public servant who is legally empowered to provide, or arrange, such protection.
The central idea is:
THREAT OF INJURY + PURPOSE TO STOP LAWFUL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION = SECTION 225
Q1. What does Section 225 punish?
Answer:
Section 225 punishes a person who:
- Holds out a threat of injury to another person;
- Does so for the purpose of inducing that person:
- To refrain; or
- To desist
- from making a legal application for protection;
- The application would be made to a public servant;
- That public servant is legally empowered to provide, or cause to be provided, such protection.
Q2. What is the object of Section 225?
Answer:
The object is to ensure that a person who is entitled to seek legal protection from a competent authority is not intimidated into silence.
The section protects:
- Access to lawful protection;
- Freedom from intimidation;
- Proper functioning of public authorities;
- The right to approach a public servant for protection.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 225 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 225 BNS = Section 190 IPC
Q4. Has Section 225 changed under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The language remains unchanged; and
- The provision has been retained as it is.
Q5. What are the essential ingredients of Section 225?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- There must be a threat of injury;
- The threat must be held out to a person;
- The purpose must be to induce that person to:
- Refrain from; or
- Desist from
- making a legal application for protection;
- The application must be for protection against injury;
- It must be intended for a public servant;
- That public servant must be legally empowered to give, or cause to be given, such protection.
Formula
THREAT OF INJURY + PURPOSE TO PREVENT LEGAL APPLICATION + COMPETENT PUBLIC SERVANT = SECTION 225
Q6. What is the prohibited act?
Answer:
The prohibited act is:
HOLDING OUT A THREAT OF INJURY
Q7. Must actual injury be caused?
Answer:
No.
The section is based on the threat, not on the actual carrying out of the threatened injury.
Q8. What does “holds out any threat of injury” mean?
Answer:
It means communicating or conveying a threat of harm to another person.
The important point is that the threat is used as pressure to stop that person from seeking lawful protection.
Q9. Is every threat covered by Section 225?
Answer:
No.
The threat must be made for the particular purpose of inducing the person:
NOT TO APPLY FOR LEGAL PROTECTION
Q10. What is the required mental element?
Answer:
The required purpose is:
TO INDUCE THE PERSON TO REFRAIN OR DESIST FROM MAKING A LEGAL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION
This specific purpose is central.
Q11. What is the meaning of “refrain”?
Answer:
It means to prevent the person from making the application in the first place.
Memory
REFRAIN = DO NOT START
Q12. What is the meaning of “desist”?
Answer:
It means to cause the person to stop or abandon the process of making the application.
Memory
DESIST = STOP / GIVE UP
Q13. Why does the section use both “refrain” and “desist”?
Answer:
Because the law protects both situations:
- Preventing the person from ever approaching the authority; and
- Forcing the person to abandon or discontinue the application.
Q14. What kind of application must be involved?
Answer:
It must be a:
LEGAL APPLICATION
for protection against injury.
Q15. Is an illegal or unlawful application protected by this section?
Answer:
The text specifically refers to a:
LEGAL APPLICATION
Therefore, the application contemplated by Section 225 must itself be lawful.
Q16. What must the person be seeking protection against?
Answer:
The application must be for protection against:
ANY INJURY
Q17. Must the threatened injury and the injury against which protection is sought be the same?
Answer:
The section does not expressly require them to be identical.
The focus is on the threat being used to stop the person from seeking lawful protection against injury.
Q18. To whom must the application be made?
Answer:
The application must be intended for:
A PUBLIC SERVANT
Q19. Is any public servant sufficient?
Answer:
No.
The public servant must be:
LEGALLY EMPOWERED
to:
- Give the protection; or
- Cause the protection to be given.
Q20. Why is legal empowerment important?
Answer:
Because the section protects an application to an authority that lawfully has the power to provide the requested protection.
An application to a person with no legal authority to provide protection would not satisfy this element.
Q21. What does “give such protection” mean?
Answer:
It means that the public servant personally has legal authority to provide the protection sought.
Q22. What does “cause such protection to be given” mean?
Answer:
It means the public servant may not personally deliver the protection but has legal authority to arrange, direct, or procure that it be provided.
Q23. Must the victim actually refrain from applying?
Answer:
The statutory wording focuses on the threat being made:
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INDUCING
the person to refrain or desist.
Actual success is not expressly required.
Q24. What if the threatened person ignores the threat and still applies for protection?
Answer:
Section 225 may still be relevant if the threat was made with the required purpose.
The failure of the threat does not necessarily remove the offence.
Q25. What if the person has already made the application?
Answer:
The word “desist” suggests that threatening conduct aimed at making the person stop or abandon the protective process may still fall within the section, depending on the facts.
Q26. Must the threat be made directly to the person seeking protection?
Answer:
The section refers to a threat held out to:
ANY PERSON
for the purpose of inducing that person not to seek protection.
The essential link is between the threat and the intended prevention of the legal application.
Q27. Must the threat be written?
Answer:
No such requirement appears.
The section is broad enough to cover threats communicated in different forms.
Q28. Must the threat be made in person?
Answer:
No.
The supplied text does not limit the threat to face-to-face communication.
Q29. Must the public servant know about the threat?
Answer:
No express requirement to that effect appears.
The offence focuses on the threatener’s conduct and purpose.
Q30. Must the application actually reach the public servant?
Answer:
No.
The section protects the right to make the application itself.
A threat intended to prevent the application may be sufficient even before any application reaches the authority.
Q31. Must protection actually be granted?
Answer:
No.
The offence is concerned with obstructing access to lawful protection, not with whether protection was ultimately granted.
Q32. Give a simple example.
Answer:
A threatens B with injury if B reports ongoing threats to a police officer who is legally empowered to provide protection.
A intends to stop B from making that lawful application.
Section 225 may apply.
Q33. Give an example involving desisting from an application.
Answer:
B has begun seeking protection from a competent authority.
A threatens B with injury unless B withdraws or abandons the request.
If the statutory ingredients are satisfied, Section 225 may apply.
Q34. What if A merely advises B not to apply?
Answer:
Advice alone is not enough.
There must be:
A THREAT OF INJURY
Q35. What if A offers B money not to apply?
Answer:
Section 225 specifically concerns:
THREAT OF INJURY
A purely financial inducement without a threat would not fall within this section on that basis alone.
Q36. Is actual fear necessary?
Answer:
The section focuses on the threat and its purpose.
It does not separately state that the victim must actually experience fear.
Q37. Is success in intimidation necessary?
Answer:
No express requirement of success appears.
The purpose of the threat is the key point.
Q38. Is dishonest intention required?
Answer:
No.
The section does not use “dishonestly.”
The relevant mental element is the specific purpose of preventing or stopping the lawful protective application.
Q39. Is fraudulent intention required?
Answer:
No.
Fraud is not an express ingredient.
Q40. Is malicious intention required?
Answer:
No.
The statute does not separately require malice.
Q41. Is financial gain required?
Answer:
No.
No financial benefit is necessary.
Q42. Is actual physical violence required?
Answer:
No.
A threat of injury is sufficient if all the statutory ingredients are present.
Q43. What is the punishment under Section 225?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 1 YEAR
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Q44. Is there a minimum sentence?
Answer:
No minimum imprisonment is stated in the supplied provision.
Q45. Is there a maximum fine specified?
Answer:
No maximum fine amount is supplied in the text provided.
Therefore, no separate fine ceiling should be invented.
Q46. What is the classification of Section 225?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Bailable
- Any Magistrate
Q47. Is Section 225 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q48. Is Section 225 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
BAILABLE
Q49. Which Court may try the offence?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
ANY MAGISTRATE
Q50. What is the easiest classification memory?
Answer:
225 = NC + BAILABLE + ANY MAGISTRATE
Q51. What right does Section 225 effectively protect?
Answer:
It protects the ability of a person to:
SEEK LAWFUL PROTECTION FROM COMPETENT PUBLIC AUTHORITY WITHOUT INTIMIDATION
Q52. Is the section about protecting the public servant?
Answer:
Indirectly, yes, but its immediate focus is protecting the person who wishes to apply for protection.
The section prevents a wrongdoer from cutting off access to lawful public assistance through threats.
Q53. What public interest does Section 225 protect?
Answer:
It supports:
- Access to legal protection;
- Proper discharge of official protective functions;
- Freedom from intimidation;
- Prevention of private coercion defeating public justice.
Q54. How does Section 225 differ from Section 226?
Answer:
Section 225
The accused:
THREATENS ANOTHER PERSON
to prevent that person from applying to a public servant for protection.
Section 226
The accused:
ATTEMPTS TO COMMIT SUICIDE
to compel or restrain a public servant in the discharge of official duty.
Memory
225 = THREAT VICTIM
226 = PRESSURE PUBLIC SERVANT
Q55. What is the common theme between Sections 225 and 226?
Answer:
Both protect lawful public authority from coercive interference.
But the direction of pressure differs:
Section 225
Pressure is applied to:
THE PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
Section 226
Pressure is applied to:
THE PUBLIC SERVANT
Q56. What is the easiest comparison between Sections 225 and 226?
Answer:
225 = STOP SOMEONE FROM GOING TO AUTHORITY
226 = FORCE AUTHORITY TO ACT OR STOP ACTING
Q57. What is the easiest problem-question test for Section 225?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was there a threat of injury?
- Was it made to induce someone to refrain or desist?
- Was the person being stopped from making a legal application for protection?
- Was the intended application to a public servant?
- Was that public servant legally empowered to provide or arrange protection?
If yes:
SECTION 225 MAY APPLY
Q58. What are the core words to remember?
Answer:
THREAT
INJURY
REFRAIN / DESIST
LEGAL APPLICATION
PROTECTION
PUBLIC SERVANT
Q59. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“THREATEN SOMEONE SO THEY DO NOT SEEK LEGAL PROTECTION = SECTION 225.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Prohibited Conduct
The accused must:
HOLD OUT A THREAT OF INJURY
2. Specific Purpose
The threat must be intended to make the person:
REFRAIN
or
DESIST
from making the protective application.
3. Nature of Application
It must be:
A LEGAL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST INJURY
4. Recipient of Application
The application must be intended for:
A PUBLIC SERVANT
5. Legal Competence
The public servant must be legally empowered:
TO GIVE PROTECTION
or
TO CAUSE PROTECTION TO BE GIVEN
6. Actual Prevention Not Expressly Required
The threat need not necessarily succeed.
The purpose of inducing restraint or abandonment is central.
Essential Ingredients — Rapid Recall
THREAT OF INJURY
+
PURPOSE TO INDUCE REFRAIN/DESIST
+
LEGAL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION
+
PUBLIC SERVANT LEGALLY EMPOWERED
= SECTION 225
Punishment Notes
Section 225 provides:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 1 YEAR
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Classification Notes
According to the supplied material:
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
ANY MAGISTRATE
IPC Equivalent and BNS Position
According to the supplied comments:
Section 225 BNS = Section 190 IPC
The language remains unchanged and the provision has been retained as it is.
Section 225 vs Section 226
Section 225
THREAT TO STOP PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
Direction of pressure
Toward the person seeking help.
Section 226
SUICIDE ATTEMPT TO COMPEL/RESTRAIN PUBLIC SERVANT
Direction of pressure
Toward the public servant.
Memory
225 = BLOCK ACCESS TO AUTHORITY
226 = COERCE AUTHORITY ITSELF
Quick Revision Notes
Section
225 BNS
Title
Threat of injury to induce person to refrain from applying for protection to public servant
IPC Equivalent
Section 190 IPC
Act
Threat of injury.
Purpose
Cause person to refrain or desist.
From What?
Making legal application for protection against injury.
To Whom?
Public servant legally empowered to provide or arrange protection.
Actual Success
Not expressly required.
Punishment
Up to 1 year / fine / both.
Classification
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Any Magistrate
BNS Change
No substantive change stated.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every threat falls under Section 225
Incorrect.
The purpose must be to stop a lawful protective application.
Trap 2 — Forgetting “legal application”
The application must be lawful.
Trap 3 — Forgetting protection against injury
The application must be for:
PROTECTION AGAINST INJURY
Trap 4 — Forgetting public servant competence
The public servant must be:
LEGALLY EMPOWERED
to provide or arrange the protection.
Trap 5 — Requiring actual injury
Incorrect.
Threat is enough if the other ingredients are present.
Trap 6 — Requiring actual success
Incorrect.
The section focuses on the purpose of inducing the person to refrain or desist.
Trap 7 — Confusing Section 225 with Section 226
Remember:
225 = THREAT PERSON SEEKING HELP
226 = SUICIDE ATTEMPT TO PRESSURE PUBLIC SERVANT
Trap 8 — Thinking only “refrain” matters
Remember both:
REFRAIN = DO NOT START
DESIST = STOP / ABANDON
Trap 9 — Thinking any official is enough
No.
The official must be legally empowered to provide or arrange the requested protection.
Rapid Revision Link: Sections 225–227
225 = THREAT TO STOP PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
226 = SUICIDE ATTEMPT TO COMPEL/RESTRAIN PUBLIC SERVANT
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
This creates a useful transition:
PROTECT ACCESS TO AUTHORITY → PROTECT AUTHORITY FROM COERCION → PROTECT TRUTH IN EVIDENCE
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 225
THREAT OF INJURY
+
PURPOSE TO MAKE PERSON REFRAIN OR DESIST
+
LEGAL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION
+
PUBLIC SERVANT LEGALLY EMPOWERED TO PROTECT
= UP TO 1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH
Key Takeaway
Section 225 BNS protects a person’s ability to seek lawful protection from a competent public servant without intimidation.
The essence of the offence is:
THREAT OF INJURY
+ PURPOSE TO STOP THE PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
+ LEGAL APPLICATION
+ COMPETENT PUBLIC SERVANT
The offender need not actually injure the person or successfully prevent the application. The critical feature is the use of a threat for the prohibited purpose.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 225 BNS = Section 190 IPC
and the provision has been retained without substantive change.
The punishment is:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH
and the offence is:
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Triable by Any Magistrate
Final Memory Line
“225 = THREATEN A PERSON SO THAT THEY DO NOT SEEK LAWFUL PROTECTION FROM A COMPETENT PUBLIC SERVANT.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 226: Attempt to Commit Suicide to Compel or Restrain Exercise of Lawful Power
Introduction
Section 226 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) creates a new offence dealing with an attempt to commit suicide when that attempt is used as a means of coercing a public servant.
The section does not punish every suicide attempt. Its focus is much narrower.
The offence arises where a person attempts to commit suicide:
- With the intention of compelling a public servant to act; or
- With the intention of restraining a public servant from acting,
in relation to the discharge of that public servant’s official duty.
The central formula is:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE + INTENT TO COMPEL/RESTRAIN PUBLIC SERVANT IN OFFICIAL DUTY = SECTION 226
Q1. What does Section 226 punish?
Answer:
Section 226 punishes a person who:
- Attempts to commit suicide; and
- Does so with the intention of compelling or restraining a public servant from discharging his official duty.
Q2. What is the object of Section 226?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the object is to prevent suicide attempts from being used as a means of:
- Coercion;
- Pressure;
- Manipulation;
- Interference with lawful authority.
The provision seeks to protect public servants from being forced to alter or abandon official duties because of extreme personal pressure tactics.
Q3. Is Section 226 an old IPC provision?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments:
SECTION 226 IS A NEW OFFENCE UNDER THE BNS
It has no corresponding IPC provision identified in the supplied material.
Q4. What are the essential ingredients of Section 226?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- There must be an attempt to commit suicide;
- The attempt must be intentional;
- The accused must have the specific intent to:
- Compel; or
- Restrain
- a public servant;
- The public servant must be concerned with the discharge of official duty.
Formula
SUICIDE ATTEMPT + SPECIFIC INTENT + PUBLIC SERVANT + OFFICIAL DUTY = SECTION 226
Q5. Does every attempt to commit suicide fall under Section 226?
Answer:
No.
This is a very important distinction.
Section 226 applies only when the attempt is made:
WITH INTENT TO COMPEL OR RESTRAIN A PUBLIC SERVANT
A suicide attempt for purely personal reasons, without this coercive purpose, does not fall within Section 226 merely because it is an attempt to commit suicide.
Q6. What is the key mens rea under Section 226?
Answer:
The key mental element is:
INTENT TO COMPEL OR RESTRAIN
the public servant in the discharge of official duty.
Q7. Is negligence enough?
Answer:
No.
The section is based on a specific intentional purpose.
Q8. Is mere emotional distress enough?
Answer:
No.
The supplied wording requires a deliberate intention to influence the public servant’s official conduct.
Q9. What does “compel” mean in this context?
Answer:
It means to pressure or force the public servant to do something in his official capacity which the person wishes him to do.
Q10. What does “restrain” mean?
Answer:
It means to pressure the public servant:
- Not to act;
- To stop acting;
- To postpone action;
- To abandon an official duty.
Q11. What is the difference between compelling and restraining?
Answer:
Compel
MAKE THE PUBLIC SERVANT DO SOMETHING
Restrain
MAKE THE PUBLIC SERVANT NOT DO SOMETHING
Memory
COMPEL = DO
RESTRAIN = DON’T DO
Q12. Must the public servant actually be influenced?
Answer:
The supplied text focuses on the accused’s intent.
Therefore, actual success in influencing the public servant is not expressly required.
Q13. Must the public servant actually stop performing his duty?
Answer:
No express requirement of actual stoppage appears in the provision.
The offence centres on:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE + INTENT TO COMPEL/RESTRAIN
Q14. Must the public servant actually perform the demanded act?
Answer:
No.
Actual compliance is not expressly required.
Q15. Why is specific intent so important here?
Answer:
Because the same physical act may have very different legal meanings depending on the purpose behind it.
A suicide attempt without any intention to influence public authority is not the same as a suicide attempt deliberately used as pressure against a public servant.
Q16. Does Section 226 require the public servant’s duty to be official?
Answer:
Yes.
The section expressly refers to:
DISCHARGING HIS OFFICIAL DUTY
Thus, the pressure must relate to the public servant’s official function.
Q17. Is a purely private dispute with a public servant enough?
Answer:
No.
The section is concerned with interference in:
OFFICIAL DUTY
not merely private interactions with someone who happens to be a public servant.
Q18. Must the public servant’s duty be lawful?
Answer:
The title refers to compelling or restraining the exercise of lawful power, and the supplied comments emphasise interference with lawful authority.
Thus, the provision is aimed at coercive pressure directed against the lawful exercise of official power.
Q19. What example is given in the supplied comments?
Answer:
The supplied comments give the example of a person who attempts to set himself on fire in front of a government office in order to pressure authorities:
- To grant an illegal benefit; or
- To stop a lawful eviction.
Such conduct may fall under Section 226.
Q20. Why does the self-immolation example fall within Section 226?
Answer:
Because the act is allegedly being used as a coercive tool to influence official action.
The critical point is not only the suicide attempt, but the purpose behind it.
Q21. Give a simple example of compelling a public servant.
Answer:
A threatens and then attempts self-harm in front of a government office, intending to force an officer to approve an application that the officer is lawfully refusing.
If the statutory ingredients are satisfied, Section 226 may apply.
Q22. Give a simple example of restraining a public servant.
Answer:
A attempts to commit suicide in order to force an officer to stop carrying out a lawful demolition or eviction order.
This may amount to an attempt to restrain the officer from discharging official duty.
Q23. What if the person merely protests peacefully?
Answer:
Peaceful protest is not the same as attempting to commit suicide.
Section 226 specifically requires:
AN ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
Q24. What if a person threatens suicide but makes no attempt?
Answer:
On the supplied wording, Section 226 requires an:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
A mere threat, without an attempt, would not satisfy that element of this section.
Q25. What if a person makes an attempt but does not communicate any demand?
Answer:
The prosecution would still need to establish the required intention to compel or restrain a public servant.
The intention may potentially be inferred from surrounding circumstances, but it cannot simply be assumed from the attempt itself.
Q26. Must the attempt occur in front of the public servant?
Answer:
The supplied wording does not expressly require physical presence before the public servant.
The key question is whether the attempt was made with the specific intent to compel or restrain that public servant.
Q27. Must the attempt be public?
Answer:
No such express requirement appears in the supplied text.
Q28. Must the accused leave a note or message?
Answer:
No.
There is no express requirement of a written demand.
However, the required intent must still be proved from the available circumstances.
Q29. Is actual injury required?
Answer:
No express requirement of actual injury appears in the section.
The offence is based on:
ATTEMPT
rather than completion.
Q30. Is death required?
Answer:
No.
By definition, Section 226 concerns an:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
Q31. Is actual suicide covered by Section 226?
Answer:
The supplied text specifically deals with an attempt.
The offence is therefore framed around a person who survives the attempt and whose conduct can be prosecuted.
Q32. Is motive such as financial gain required?
Answer:
No.
The specific purpose is:
TO COMPEL OR RESTRAIN A PUBLIC SERVANT
No financial motive is required.
Q33. Is malice required?
Answer:
No.
Malice is not expressly stated as an ingredient.
Q34. Is dishonesty required?
Answer:
No.
The section does not use the term “dishonestly.”
The key mens rea is the coercive intention.
Q35. Is fraud required?
Answer:
No.
Fraud is not an express ingredient.
Q36. What is the punishment under Section 226?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT UP TO 1 YEAR
or
FINE
or
BOTH
or
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Q37. Is imprisonment rigorous or simple?
Answer:
The provision expressly states:
SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT
Q38. What is the maximum term of imprisonment?
Answer:
1 YEAR
Q39. Is there a specified maximum fine in the supplied text?
Answer:
No specific fine ceiling is supplied.
Therefore, no separate maximum amount should be invented.
Q40. Is community service available?
Answer:
Yes.
Section 226 expressly provides:
COMMUNITY SERVICE
as one of the possible punishments.
Q41. Why is community service noteworthy?
Answer:
Because it gives the Court an alternative to imprisonment or fine in an appropriate case.
For examination purposes, remember that Section 226 expressly includes community service.
Q42. What is the classification of Section 226?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Bailable
- Any Magistrate
Q43. Is Section 226 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q44. Is Section 226 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
BAILABLE
Q45. Which Court may try the offence?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
ANY MAGISTRATE
Q46. What is the easiest classification memory?
Answer:
226 = NC + BAILABLE + ANY MAGISTRATE
Q47. Is Section 226 an offence against the public servant personally?
Answer:
Not merely in a personal sense.
The deeper concern is protection of:
OFFICIAL DUTY AND LAWFUL PUBLIC AUTHORITY
The provision seeks to prevent extreme pressure from distorting the exercise of official power.
Q48. What public interest does Section 226 protect?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, it protects:
- Sanctity of lawful authority;
- Uninterrupted discharge of official duties;
- Freedom of public servants from extreme coercive pressure;
- Orderly administration of government functions.
Q49. What is the central wrong under Section 226?
Answer:
The central wrong is:
USING A SUICIDE ATTEMPT AS A TOOL OF COERCION AGAINST PUBLIC AUTHORITY
Q50. Does Section 226 criminalise a person’s emotional state?
Answer:
No.
The statutory focus is conduct plus specific intent.
The offence is not established merely because a person is distressed or suicidal.
Q51. What must the prosecution particularly prove?
Answer:
The prosecution must establish the connection between:
- The suicide attempt; and
- The intention to compel or restrain the public servant.
Memory
ATTEMPT + COERCIVE PURPOSE
Q52. Why is the causal or purposive link important?
Answer:
Because without that link, the act may fall outside Section 226.
The prosecution cannot simply infer Section 226 from the fact that a suicide attempt occurred near a government office.
Q53. What if a person attempts suicide because of frustration with a government decision but does not intend to influence any officer?
Answer:
On the supplied wording, Section 226 would require proof of an intention to compel or restrain a public servant.
Mere frustration with a decision, without that specific purpose, is not the same thing.
Q54. What if the person’s purpose is to force an illegal favour?
Answer:
That fits closely with the example supplied in the commentary.
If a person attempts suicide specifically to pressure an officer into granting an illegal benefit, Section 226 may apply.
Q55. What if the person’s purpose is to stop a lawful eviction?
Answer:
Again, the supplied comments expressly use this as an example.
If the suicide attempt is intended to prevent officials from carrying out the lawful eviction, the offence may be attracted.
Q56. Is the section limited to government offices?
Answer:
No.
The statute refers broadly to:
ANY PUBLIC SERVANT
The location is not the defining element.
Q57. Must the public servant be named or specifically identified?
Answer:
The supplied text does not expressly require naming the individual, but the prosecution must establish that the attempt was intended to compel or restrain a public servant in relation to official duty.
Q58. What is the easiest problem-question test?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was there an attempt to commit suicide?
- Was the act done with a specific intention?
- Was that intention to compel or restrain a public servant?
- Was the pressure connected with the public servant’s official duty?
If yes:
SECTION 226 MAY APPLY
Q59. What are the four key words to remember?
Answer:
ATTEMPT
SUICIDE
COMPEL / RESTRAIN
PUBLIC SERVANT
Q60. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“SUICIDE ATTEMPT USED TO PRESSURE PUBLIC SERVANT = SECTION 226.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Nature of the Offence
Section 226 is a:
NEW BNS OFFENCE
according to the supplied comments.
2. Act
The accused must:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
3. Specific Intention
The purpose must be:
TO COMPEL
or
TO RESTRAIN
a public servant.
4. Official-Duty Requirement
The coercion must relate to:
DISCHARGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY
5. Actual Success Not Expressly Required
The public servant need not actually yield to the pressure.
The provision centres on the accused’s intent.
6. Mere Suicide Attempt Is Not Enough
There must be:
COERCIVE INTENT TOWARD PUBLIC AUTHORITY
Essential Ingredients — Rapid Recall
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
+
INTENT
+
COMPEL OR RESTRAIN
+
PUBLIC SERVANT
+
OFFICIAL DUTY
= SECTION 226
Punishment Notes
Section 226 provides four possible forms of punishment:
SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT UP TO 1 YEAR
or
FINE
or
BOTH
or
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Memory
1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH / COMMUNITY SERVICE
Classification Notes
According to the supplied material:
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
ANY MAGISTRATE
IPC Position
According to the supplied comments:
NO IPC EQUIVALENT — NEW BNS OFFENCE
Section 226 — Conceptual Distinction
The provision should not be remembered as:
“ATTEMPT TO SUICIDE = OFFENCE”
That is too broad.
The correct formulation is:
“ATTEMPT TO SUICIDE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COERCING A PUBLIC SERVANT = SECTION 226.”
This specific-purpose element is the heart of the section.
Quick Revision Notes
Section
226 BNS
Title
Attempt to commit suicide to compel or restrain exercise of lawful power
Nature
New BNS offence.
Act
Attempt to commit suicide.
Mens Rea
Intent to compel or restrain.
Target
Public servant.
Context
Discharge of official duty.
Actual Compliance
Not expressly required.
Punishment
Simple imprisonment up to 1 year / fine / both / community service.
Classification
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Any Magistrate
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every suicide attempt falls under Section 226
Incorrect.
The special intent to influence a public servant is essential.
Trap 2 — Forgetting the public-servant element
The pressure must be directed toward:
A PUBLIC SERVANT
Trap 3 — Forgetting official duty
The coercion must concern:
OFFICIAL DUTY
not merely a private interaction.
Trap 4 — Requiring actual success
Incorrect.
The public servant need not actually comply.
Trap 5 — Requiring actual death
Incorrect.
The section concerns an:
ATTEMPT
Trap 6 — Treating a mere threat of suicide as enough
The supplied wording requires an actual:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
Trap 7 — Forgetting both verbs
Remember:
COMPEL
or
RESTRAIN
Either may satisfy the section.
Trap 8 — Confusing punishment type
The imprisonment is:
SIMPLE
not rigorous.
Trap 9 — Forgetting community service
Section 226 expressly includes:
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Trap 10 — Inventing an IPC equivalent
According to the supplied comments:
THIS IS A NEW BNS OFFENCE
Rapid Revision Link: Section 226 to Chapter XIV
Section 226 precedes Chapter XIV.
The sequence can therefore be remembered as:
226 = COERCE PUBLIC SERVANT BY SUICIDE ATTEMPT
then:
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
This creates a useful transition from protection of lawful public authority into the false-evidence chapter.
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 226
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
+
INTENT TO COMPEL OR RESTRAIN
+
PUBLIC SERVANT
+
DISCHARGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY
= UP TO 1 YEAR SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT / FINE / BOTH / COMMUNITY SERVICE
Key Takeaway
Section 226 BNS does not criminalise every suicide attempt. It targets the use of a suicide attempt as a coercive instrument against public authority.
The essence of the offence is:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
+ SPECIFIC INTENT TO COMPEL OR RESTRAIN
+ PUBLIC SERVANT
+ OFFICIAL DUTY
According to the supplied comments, Section 226 is a new offence introduced by the BNS and is aimed at preventing extreme coercive tactics from interfering with lawful official action.
Its punishment is:
SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT UP TO 1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH / COMMUNITY SERVICE
and the offence is:
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Triable by Any Magistrate
Final Memory Line
“226 = SUICIDE ATTEMPT USED AS PRESSURE TO MAKE A PUBLIC SERVANT ACT OR STOP ACTING.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Chapter XIV: Of False Evidence and Offences Against Public Justice
Introduction
Chapter XIV of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) deals with offences which threaten the integrity of evidence, judicial proceedings, lawful investigation, Court processes, punishment of offenders, and the proper functioning of public justice.
According to the supplied introduction, the Chapter contains 43 sections, from Sections 227 to 269.
The chapter broadly covers two major areas:
1. FALSE EVIDENCE
and
2. OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC JUSTICE
The supplied introduction states that:
- Sections 227 to 237 principally concern giving and fabricating false evidence; and
- Sections 238 onwards principally concern offences against public justice.
The Chapter can therefore be understood as protecting the justice system at every stage:
TRUTH → EVIDENCE → INVESTIGATION → COURT PROCESS → OFFENDERS → PUBLIC SERVANTS → CUSTODY → APPEARANCE BEFORE COURT
Q1. What is the title of Chapter XIV?
Answer:
OF FALSE EVIDENCE AND OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC JUSTICE
Q2. Which sections are contained in Chapter XIV?
Answer:
According to the supplied introduction:
SECTIONS 227 TO 269
This gives a total of:
43 SECTIONS
Q3. What are the two broad subjects covered by Chapter XIV?
Answer:
The Chapter covers:
- False evidence; and
- Offences against public justice.
Q4. What is the general object of this Chapter?
Answer:
The object is to preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the administration of justice.
The Chapter punishes conduct which may:
- Corrupt evidence;
- Mislead Courts;
- Obstruct investigation;
- Screen offenders;
- Harbour offenders;
- Abuse Court processes;
- Interfere with apprehension or custody;
- Corruptly misuse official authority; or
- Defeat lawful Court obligations.
Q5. Why is false evidence treated seriously?
Answer:
Courts and public authorities depend upon truthful evidence to reach correct conclusions.
False evidence may:
- Cause wrongful conviction;
- Cause wrongful acquittal;
- Distort civil liability;
- Mislead public authorities;
- Undermine trust in judicial proceedings.
Thus, the chapter treats false evidence as an offence against the justice system itself.
Q6. Which sections principally deal with giving and fabricating false evidence?
Answer:
According to the supplied introduction:
SECTIONS 227 TO 237
The supplied classification also includes:
SECTION 241
within this broad sub-head because Section 241 deals with destruction of a document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence.
Q7. What is the basic sequence of Sections 227 to 237?
Answer:
The sequence can be remembered as follows:
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL CONVICTION
232 = THREATEN PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
Q8. What does Section 227 principally concern?
Answer:
Section 227 defines:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
Its essence is:
LEGAL DUTY TO SPEAK TRUTH + FALSE STATEMENT + REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE/BELIEF
Q9. What does Section 228 principally concern?
Answer:
Section 228 defines:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Its essence is:
CREATE FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL + INTEND IT TO APPEAR IN EVIDENCE + INTEND TO MISLEAD ON MATERIAL POINT
Q10. What does Section 229 do?
Answer:
Section 229 provides the general punishment for intentionally:
- Giving false evidence; or
- Fabricating false evidence.
It distinguishes between:
- Judicial proceedings; and
- Other cases.
Memory
229 = PUNISHMENT SECTION
Q11. What do Sections 230 and 231 deal with?
Answer:
These are aggravated false-evidence provisions.
Section 230
False evidence intended to procure conviction for a:
CAPITAL OFFENCE
Section 231
False evidence intended to procure conviction for a serious:
NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE PUNISHABLE WITH LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
Q12. What does Section 232 deal with?
Answer:
Section 232 punishes:
THREATENING ANY PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
It therefore protects witnesses and other persons from coercion designed to corrupt the truth-finding process.
Q13. What does Section 233 deal with?
Answer:
Section 233 punishes:
CORRUPTLY USING OR ATTEMPTING TO USE FALSE OR FABRICATED EVIDENCE AS TRUE OR GENUINE
Q14. What is the significance of Sections 234 and 235?
Answer:
These sections form the:
FALSE CERTIFICATE PAIR
Section 234
ISSUE OR SIGN FALSE CERTIFICATE
Section 235
USE FALSE CERTIFICATE AS TRUE
Q15. What is the significance of Sections 236 and 237?
Answer:
These sections form the:
FALSE DECLARATION PAIR
Section 236
MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
Section 237
USE FALSE DECLARATION AS TRUE
Q16. What does Section 241 add to the evidence-related offences?
Answer:
Section 241 deals with:
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT OR ELECTRONIC RECORD TO PREVENT ITS PRODUCTION AS EVIDENCE
It therefore protects evidence not merely from falsification, but also from deliberate suppression or destruction.
Q17. Which sections concern disappearance of evidence and screening offenders?
Answer:
According to the supplied introduction:
SECTIONS 238 TO 240
Q18. What is the basic sequence of Sections 238 to 240?
Answer:
238 = CAUSE DISAPPEARANCE OF EVIDENCE / GIVE FALSE INFORMATION TO SCREEN
239 = INTENTIONALLY OMIT INFORMATION WHEN LEGALLY BOUND TO INFORM
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT AN OFFENCE COMMITTED
Memory
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
Q19. What is the central idea of Section 238?
Answer:
Section 238 targets a person who, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed:
- Causes evidence to disappear; or
- Gives false information,
with the:
INTENTION OF SCREENING THE OFFENDER FROM LEGAL PUNISHMENT
Q20. How is Section 239 different from Section 240?
Answer:
Section 239
The person:
SHOULD INFORM BUT INTENTIONALLY REMAINS SILENT
because he is legally bound to give information.
Section 240
The person:
GIVES INFORMATION, BUT THE INFORMATION IS FALSE
Memory
239 = SILENCE
240 = FALSE SPEECH
Q21. Which provisions concern abuse of Court process according to the supplied introduction?
Answer:
The supplied introduction identifies:
SECTIONS 243 TO 248 AND SECTION 269
under the broad heading of:
ABUSE OF PROCESS OF COURT
Q22. What types of conduct fall within Sections 243 to 248?
Answer:
These provisions broadly address dishonest or fraudulent interference with judicial and enforcement processes, including:
- Concealing or transferring property to defeat lawful seizure;
- Making fraudulent claims to property;
- Fraudulently allowing false decrees;
- Making false claims in Court;
- Fraudulently obtaining decrees;
- Making false criminal charges.
Q23. What does Section 243 deal with?
Answer:
Section 243 concerns:
FRAUDULENT REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT, TRANSFER OR DELIVERY OF PROPERTY
with intent to prevent lawful taking by forfeiture, fine, or execution.
Q24. What does Section 244 deal with?
Answer:
Section 244 concerns:
FRAUDULENT FALSE CLAIM TO PROPERTY OR INTEREST
with intent to prevent lawful seizure or execution.
Memory
243 = MOVE/HIDE PROPERTY
244 = FALSELY CLAIM PROPERTY
Q25. What do Sections 245 to 247 principally concern?
Answer:
They deal with fraudulent abuse of civil Court process.
Section 245
SUFFER FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF
Section 246
MAKE FALSE CLAIM IN COURT
Section 247
OBTAIN FALSE DECREE AGAINST ANOTHER
Memory
245 = SUFFER
246 = CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN
Q26. What does Section 248 deal with?
Answer:
Section 248 punishes:
FALSE CHARGE OF OFFENCE MADE WITH INTENT TO INJURE
It is therefore concerned with misuse of criminal process by knowingly instituting or causing a false criminal accusation without lawful ground.
Q27. What role does Section 269 play in the supplied abuse-of-process classification?
Answer:
Section 269 deals with:
FAILURE BY PERSON RELEASED ON BAIL BOND OR BOND TO APPEAR IN COURT
The supplied introduction places it within the broad abuse-of-Court-process grouping because it concerns non-compliance with a formal obligation to appear before Court.
Q28. Which section is identified under false personation?
Answer:
The supplied introduction identifies:
SECTION 242
and also mentions:
SECTION 248
under the heading “False personation.”
However, this appears to contain a classification inconsistency in the supplied introduction because Section 248, as separately studied, concerns false charge of offence made with intent to injure, whereas Section 242 is the provision specifically dealing with false personation in a suit or prosecution.
For revision, the clear personation provision is:
SECTION 242
Q29. What does Section 242 deal with?
Answer:
Section 242 punishes:
FALSE PERSONATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN ACT OR PROCEEDING IN A SUIT OR PROSECUTION
The accused assumes another identity and performs a legal act in that assumed character.
Q30. Which provisions concern harbouring offenders?
Answer:
According to the supplied introduction:
SECTIONS 249, 253 AND 254
Q31. What does Section 249 deal with?
Answer:
Section 249 concerns:
HARBOURING OR CONCEALING AN OFFENDER AFTER AN OFFENCE
with knowledge or reason to believe that the person is an offender and with intent to screen him from legal punishment.
Memory
249 = HIDE OFFENDER AFTER CRIME
Q32. What does Section 253 deal with?
Answer:
Section 253 concerns harbouring or concealing:
- A person who has escaped from lawful custody; or
- A person whose lawful apprehension has been ordered.
Memory
253 = ESCAPEE / APPREHENSION ORDER
Q33. What does Section 254 deal with?
Answer:
Section 254 concerns:
HARBOURING ROBBERS OR DACOITS
either to facilitate robbery or dacoity or to screen them from punishment.
Memory
254 = ROBBERS / DACOITS
Q34. Which provisions concern offences by public servants according to the supplied introduction?
Answer:
The supplied introduction identifies:
SECTIONS 255 TO 268
as the broad group concerning offences by public servants.
Q35. What kind of public-servant misconduct is covered in Sections 255 onwards?
Answer:
These provisions broadly address misuse or failure of official powers connected with justice, including:
- Disobeying law to save persons or property;
- Preparing incorrect records;
- Corrupt or malicious judicial acts;
- Illegal commitment or confinement;
- Intentional failure to apprehend;
- Negligent escape from custody;
- Resistance to lawful apprehension;
- Failure to keep persons in confinement;
- Misconduct connected with judicial proceedings.
Q36. What do Sections 255 and 256 deal with?
Answer:
Section 255
A public servant:
KNOWINGLY DISOBEYS A LEGAL DIRECTION
with intent to save a person from punishment, reduce punishment, or save property.
Section 256
A public servant:
KNOWINGLY PREPARES AN INCORRECT RECORD OR WRITING
with intent or knowledge to cause harm or save a person/property.
Memory
255 = DISOBEY LAW
256 = FALSE RECORD
Q37. What do Sections 257 and 258 principally concern?
Answer:
Section 257
A public servant in a judicial proceeding corruptly or maliciously makes:
- Report;
- Order;
- Verdict; or
- Decision
knowing it to be contrary to law.
Section 258
A person having legal authority corruptly or maliciously:
- Commits another for trial;
- Commits another to confinement; or
- Keeps another in confinement,
knowing the act to be contrary to law.
Q38. What broad theme runs through Sections 259 to 265?
Answer:
These sections concern:
APPREHENSION, CUSTODY, ESCAPE AND RESCUE
They allocate liability according to:
- Who had the legal duty;
- Whether conduct was intentional or negligent;
- Whether the offender was charged, sentenced, or lawfully committed;
- Whether the accused resisted, escaped, obstructed or rescued.
Q39. What is the easiest memory sequence for Sections 259 to 265?
Answer:
259 = PUBLIC SERVANT INTENTIONALLY FAILS — CHARGED/APPREHENDABLE PERSON
260 = PUBLIC SERVANT INTENTIONALLY FAILS — SENTENCED/LAWFULLY COMMITTED PERSON
261 = PUBLIC SERVANT NEGLIGENTLY SUFFERS ESCAPE
262 = PERSON RESISTS OWN LAWFUL APPREHENSION / ESCAPES
263 = RESIST/RESCUE ANOTHER
264 = PUBLIC SERVANT RESIDUAL OMISSION/ESCAPE CASE
265 = RESIDUAL RESISTANCE/ESCAPE/RESCUE
Q40. What do Sections 266 to 268 cover?
Answer:
They continue the public-justice framework.
Section 266
VIOLATION OF CONDITION OF REMISSION OF PUNISHMENT
Section 267
INTENTIONAL INSULT OR INTERRUPTION TO PUBLIC SERVANT IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Section 268
PERSONATION OF ASSESSOR
Q41. Does the supplied introductory classification contain any numbering or grouping inconsistencies?
Answer:
Yes, there are a few points worth noting carefully.
First, the introduction states that offences against public justice run from:
SECTIONS 238 TO 268
but the Chapter itself extends to:
SECTION 269
and Section 269 is separately included under abuse of Court process.
Second, under false personation, the introduction lists:
SECTIONS 242 AND 248
but Section 248, as separately studied, concerns false charge of offence with intent to injure, not personation.
Third, the heading “giving and fabricating false evidence” includes:
SECTION 241
which is more specifically concerned with destruction of documentary/electronic evidence to prevent its production.
These points are best treated as broad editorial grouping rather than strict statutory categorisation.
Q42. What is the best overall structure for studying Chapter XIV?
Answer:
A useful six-part study structure is:
1. FALSE EVIDENCE
Sections 227–237, with Section 241 closely connected.
2. SCREENING / FALSE INFORMATION
Sections 238–240.
3. COURT PROCESS / FALSE CLAIMS / PROPERTY EVASION
Sections 243–248 and Section 269.
4. FALSE PERSONATION
Principally Section 242.
5. HARBOURING
Sections 249, 253 and 254.
6. PUBLIC SERVANT / CUSTODY / JUSTICE-ADMINISTRATION OFFENCES
Sections 255–268.
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
Group 1 — False Evidence
227–237 + 241
Core themes:
- Give false evidence;
- Fabricate false evidence;
- Punishment;
- Capital-conviction false evidence;
- Serious non-capital false evidence;
- Threatening witnesses;
- Using false evidence;
- False certificates;
- False declarations;
- Destroying documentary/electronic evidence.
Memory
GIVE – FABRICATE – PUNISH – AGGRAVATE – THREAT – USE – CERTIFY – DECLARE – DESTROY
Group 2 — Disappearance of Evidence / Screening
238–240
Memory
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
Group 3 — Abuse of Court Process
243–248 + 269
Core themes:
- Hide property;
- False property claim;
- False decree;
- False Court claim;
- False criminal charge;
- Failure to appear after bail.
Memory
HIDE – CLAIM – DECREE – CLAIM – ACCUSE – FAIL TO APPEAR
Group 4 — False Personation
242
Core theme:
ASSUME FALSE IDENTITY IN SUIT OR PROSECUTION
Group 5 — Harbouring
249, 253, 254
Memory
249 = OFFENDER
253 = ESCAPEE / APPREHENSION ORDER
254 = ROBBER / DACOIT
Group 6 — Public Servant and Custody Offences
255–268
Core themes:
- Official disobedience;
- False official records;
- Corrupt judicial acts;
- Illegal confinement;
- Failure to apprehend;
- Custodial escape;
- Resistance and rescue;
- Remission violation;
- Judicial interruption;
- Personation of assessor.
Quick Revision Notes
Chapter
XIV
Title
Of False Evidence and Offences Against Public Justice
Sections
227–269
Total
43 sections
Main Themes
False evidence + interference with administration of justice.
First Block
227–237 — false evidence and related conduct.
Screening Block
238–240
Evidence Destruction
241
Personation
242
Court/Property Process
243–248
Harbouring
249, 253, 254
Public Servant / Custody
255–268
Failure to Appear
269
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking Chapter XIV is only about perjury
Incorrect.
It covers a much wider field of offences against public justice.
Trap 2 — Treating Sections 227 and 228 as punishment provisions
Incorrect.
They principally define:
227 = GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
while Section 229 provides the general punishment.
Trap 3 — Forgetting Section 241
Although numerically outside Sections 227–237, it is closely connected with evidence because it punishes destruction of documentary or electronic evidence.
Trap 4 — Confusing Section 242 and Section 248
Remember:
242 = FALSE PERSONATION
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
The supplied introductory grouping appears inconsistent on this point.
Trap 5 — Ending the Chapter at Section 268
The Chapter extends to:
SECTION 269
Trap 6 — Treating all harbouring offences as the same
Remember:
249 = OFFENDER AFTER CRIME
253 = ESCAPEE / APPREHENSION ORDER
254 = ROBBERS / DACOITS
Trap 7 — Confusing Sections 259 and 260
Use the exact distinction:
259 = PERSON CHARGED WITH OR LIABLE TO APPREHENSION FOR AN OFFENCE
260 = PERSON UNDER SENTENCE OF COURT OR LAWFULLY COMMITTED TO CUSTODY
Trap 8 — Confusing intentional and negligent custodial offences
Remember:
260 = INTENTIONAL
261 = NEGLIGENT
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 227–269
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION
241 = DESTROY EVIDENCE
242 = FALSE PERSONATION
243 = HIDE PROPERTY
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
249 = HARBOUR OFFENDER
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
252 = TAKE TO RECOVER
253 = HARBOUR ESCAPEE / PERSON WANTED
254 = HARBOUR ROBBERS / DACOITS
255 = PUBLIC SERVANT DISOBEYS LAW
256 = INCORRECT OFFICIAL RECORD
257 = CORRUPT JUDICIAL REPORT/ORDER/DECISION
258 = ILLEGAL COMMITMENT / CONFINEMENT
259 = INTENTIONAL FAILURE — CHARGED/APPREHENDABLE PERSON
260 = INTENTIONAL FAILURE — SENTENCED/COMMITTED PERSON
261 = NEGLIGENT ESCAPE
262 = RESIST OWN APPREHENSION / ESCAPE
263 = RESIST/RESCUE ANOTHER
264 = RESIDUAL PUBLIC-SERVANT FAILURE
265 = RESIDUAL RESIST/ESCAPE/RESCUE
266 = VIOLATE REMISSION CONDITION
267 = INSULT / INTERRUPT JUDICIAL PUBLIC SERVANT
268 = PERSONATE ASSESSOR
269 = FAIL TO APPEAR AFTER BAIL/BOND
Master Memory Formula
The entire Chapter may be remembered as:
FALSE EVIDENCE
→
SCREENING
→
DESTROY / PERSONATE / ABUSE COURT PROCESS
→
HARBOURING
→
PUBLIC SERVANT MISCONDUCT
→
APPREHENSION / ESCAPE / RESCUE
→
JUDICIAL ORDER AND APPEARANCE
Ultra-Short Chapter Memory
LIE → FABRICATE → SCREEN → HIDE → HARBOUR → ABUSE OFFICE → ESCAPE → DISRUPT JUSTICE
Key Takeaway
Chapter XIV is a broad protection of the administration of justice.
It does not merely punish perjury. It also punishes conduct that:
- Manufactures or uses false evidence;
- Hides or destroys evidence;
- Screens or harbours offenders;
- Misuses Court processes;
- Makes false claims or false charges;
- Corrupts official records and judicial functions;
- Facilitates escape or obstructs apprehension;
- Interferes with judicial proceedings;
- Defeats lawful bail and appearance obligations.
The best conceptual summary is:
227–237 = CORRUPT THE TRUTH
238–254 = OBSTRUCT OR DEFEAT JUSTICE
255–268 = MISUSE / OBSTRUCT PUBLIC JUSTICE AND CUSTODY
269 = FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE COURT
Final Memory Line
“CHAPTER XIV PROTECTS THE JUSTICE SYSTEM FROM FALSEHOOD, CONCEALMENT, SCREENING, PERSONATION, HARBOURING, OFFICIAL ABUSE, ESCAPE AND DEFIANCE OF COURT PROCESS.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 227: Giving False Evidence
Introduction
Section 227 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) defines the offence of giving false evidence.
The offence arises where a person who is legally bound to state the truth, either by oath or by an express provision of law, or who is legally bound to make a declaration on a subject, makes a statement that is false and:
- Knows it to be false; or
- Believes it to be false; or
- Does not believe it to be true.
The provision therefore targets deliberate falsehood by a person who is under a legally recognised obligation of truthfulness.
The central formula is:
LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH + FALSE STATEMENT/DECLARATION + KNOWS FALSE / BELIEVES FALSE / DOES NOT BELIEVE TRUE = SECTION 227
Q1. What does Section 227 define?
Answer:
Section 227 defines:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
It identifies the circumstances in which a false statement becomes legally punishable as false evidence.
Q2. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 227 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 227 BNS = Section 191 IPC
Q3. Has Section 227 changed under BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The language remains unchanged; and
- The provision has been retained as it is.
Q4. What is the central idea behind Section 227?
Answer:
The central idea is that a person who is legally required to speak truthfully must not knowingly make a false statement.
Memory
BOUND TO TRUTH + KNOWING FALSEHOOD = FALSE EVIDENCE
Q5. What are the essential ingredients of Section 227?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- The person must be legally bound by oath to state the truth; or
- The person must be legally bound by an express provision of law to state the truth; or
- The person must be legally bound to make a declaration on a subject;
- The person makes a statement;
- The statement is false;
- The person:
- Knows it is false; or
- Believes it is false; or
- Does not believe it to be true.
Formula
LEGAL OBLIGATION + FALSE STATEMENT + REQUIRED STATE OF MIND = SECTION 227
Q6. What are the three possible sources of the legal obligation?
Answer:
The obligation may arise because the person is:
- Bound by oath to state the truth;
- Bound by express provision of law to state the truth; or
- Bound by law to make a declaration on a particular subject.
Memory
OATH – EXPRESS LAW – LEGAL DECLARATION
Q7. Must the person always be under oath?
Answer:
No.
An oath is one possible source of the obligation, but not the only one.
The obligation may also arise from:
- An express provision of law; or
- A legal duty to make a declaration.
Q8. Why is this important?
Answer:
Because Section 227 is broader than a narrow concept of false testimony under oath.
The decisive question is:
WAS THE PERSON LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE THE TRUTH?
Q9. What is meant by being “legally bound by an oath”?
Answer:
It means the person is placed under a legally recognised oath requiring truthful evidence or declaration.
According to the supplied comments, the authority administering the oath must possess the requisite legal competence.
Q10. What is meant by being bound by an express provision of law?
Answer:
It means that a legal provision itself imposes a duty upon the person to state the truth.
Thus, an oath is unnecessary where the obligation arises directly from law.
Q11. What is meant by being bound by law to make a declaration?
Answer:
It means the law requires the person to make a declaration on a particular subject, and that declaration must be truthful.
A knowingly false declaration may therefore fall within Section 227.
Q12. Must the statement actually be false?
Answer:
Yes.
The statement must be objectively false.
Q13. Is a statement punishable merely because it later turns out to be incorrect?
Answer:
No.
There must also be the required mental state.
The person must:
KNOW IT IS FALSE
or
BELIEVE IT IS FALSE
or
NOT BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE
Q14. What are the three mental states recognised by Section 227?
Answer:
They are:
- Knowledge of falsity;
- Belief in falsity;
- Absence of belief in truth.
Memory
KNOW FALSE – BELIEVE FALSE – DO NOT BELIEVE TRUE
Q15. Why does the section include “does not believe it to be true”?
Answer:
Because a person may avoid claiming direct knowledge but still speak without believing the statement is true.
The section captures that situation as well.
Q16. Is negligence enough?
Answer:
No.
Mere carelessness, confusion, mistake, or faulty memory is not automatically enough.
The required mental state must be established.
Q17. What does Explanation 1 provide?
Answer:
Explanation 1 states that a statement falls within Section 227 whether it is made:
VERBALLY OR OTHERWISE
Q18. What is the significance of Explanation 1?
Answer:
It shows that false evidence is not confined to spoken testimony.
A statement may be made through another form of communication.
Q19. Can a written statement fall within Section 227?
Answer:
Yes.
The phrase “verbally or otherwise” is broad enough to include non-verbal forms of statement.
Q20. What does Explanation 2 provide?
Answer:
Explanation 2 states that a false statement about a person’s own belief may itself amount to false evidence.
A person may be guilty by saying:
- He believes something which he does not believe; or
- He knows something which he does not know.
Q21. Why is Explanation 2 important?
Answer:
Because Section 227 does not only punish false statements about external facts.
It also punishes false statements about the person’s own:
- Belief;
- Knowledge;
- State of mind.
Q22. Give an example of false evidence about belief.
Answer:
A says:
“I believe this signature is Z’s.”
But A does not actually believe that.
If he is legally bound to state the truth, Section 227 may apply.
Q23. Give an example of false evidence about knowledge.
Answer:
A says:
“I know Z was at the place.”
But A has no knowledge whatsoever about whether Z was there.
The statement about A’s own knowledge is false.
Q24. What does Illustration (a) provide?
Answer:
A supports a just claim that B has against Z for ₹1,000.
A falsely swears at trial that he heard Z admit B’s claim.
A has given false evidence.
Q25. Why is Illustration (a) important?
Answer:
Because it shows that:
EVEN IF THE UNDERLYING CLAIM IS JUST, FALSE EVIDENCE REMAINS FALSE EVIDENCE
The truth of the overall case does not excuse the deliberate lie.
Q26. Does a good motive excuse false evidence?
Answer:
No.
A person cannot knowingly lie merely because he believes he is helping a person with a legitimate claim.
Q27. What does Illustration (b) provide?
Answer:
A, being bound by oath to state the truth, states that he believes a certain signature is Z’s handwriting when he does not actually believe that.
A gives false evidence.
Q28. What principle does Illustration (b) establish?
Answer:
It establishes:
FALSE STATEMENT ABOUT ONE’S OWN BELIEF = FALSE EVIDENCE
Q29. What does Illustration (c) provide?
Answer:
A knows the general character of Z’s handwriting and states that he believes a particular signature to be Z’s.
A genuinely believes this.
Even if the signature is actually not Z’s, A has not given false evidence.
Q30. Why is Illustration (c) important?
Answer:
Because it distinguishes:
FACTUAL ERROR
from
DISHONEST OR KNOWING FALSEHOOD
A can be mistaken and still truthful about what he genuinely believes.
Q31. What is the lesson from Illustration (c)?
Answer:
WRONG BELIEF ≠ FALSE EVIDENCE
if the belief is genuinely held.
Q32. What does Illustration (d) provide?
Answer:
A, being bound by oath, states that he knows Z was at a particular place on a certain day, when A actually knows nothing about the matter.
A gives false evidence.
Q33. What is striking about Illustration (d)?
Answer:
A may be guilty whether Z was actually there or not.
Why?
Because A falsely claims to possess knowledge which he does not possess.
Q34. What principle emerges from Illustration (d)?
Answer:
FALSE CLAIM OF KNOWLEDGE CAN ITSELF BE FALSE EVIDENCE
The external fact may even turn out to be true.
Q35. What does Illustration (e) provide?
Answer:
An interpreter or translator gives or certifies as true an interpretation or translation which:
- He is bound by oath to interpret or translate truly;
- Is in fact not true; and
- He does not believe to be true.
He has given false evidence.
Q36. Why are interpreters and translators included?
Answer:
Because the integrity of proceedings depends not only on witnesses but also on those who transmit or interpret statements and documents.
A knowingly false translation can distort evidence just as effectively as false testimony.
Q37. Can an interpreter commit false evidence without being a witness to the underlying facts?
Answer:
Yes.
His duty concerns the accuracy of the interpretation or translation.
Q38. What does the supplied commentary say about perjury?
Answer:
The supplied comments explain that the concept resembles the English offence of:
PERJURY
However, Section 227 is framed according to the Indian statutory concept of being legally bound to state the truth or make a declaration.
Q39. Is Section 227 restricted only to false evidence before a Court?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, no.
The section does not impose such a narrow limitation.
It extends to situations where a person is legally bound by oath or express law to state the truth.
Q40. Why is Section 227 broader than a narrow courtroom-only concept?
Answer:
Because the legal obligation to speak truthfully may arise outside the physical courtroom.
The focus is on:
LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH
rather than location alone.
Q41. What role does the Oaths Act play according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
The supplied comments explain that the Oaths Act provides for administration of oaths by competent Courts and authorised persons and reinforces the obligation of persons giving evidence to speak truthfully.
Q42. What is the purpose of an oath according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
The supplied comments identify two broad purposes:
- To support prosecution where false evidence is given; and
- To impress upon the person the seriousness of the occasion and the duty to speak truthfully.
Q43. What happens if an oath is omitted by mistake?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, where a competent authority fails, mistakenly or intentionally, to administer the oath, the obligation to give truthful evidence does not necessarily disappear.
The comments refer to Section 8 of the Oaths Act in this context.
Q44. Does irregularity in administering an oath automatically invalidate evidence?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, no.
An irregularity or omission in administering the oath does not automatically:
- Invalidate the proceeding; or
- Render the evidence inadmissible.
Q45. Is competence of the oath-administering authority nevertheless important?
Answer:
Yes.
The supplied comments distinguish between:
- A competent authority that irregularly omits or administers an oath; and
- A body that had no jurisdiction or legal competence to administer the oath at all.
This distinction becomes important in the supplied cases.
Q46. What did the Supreme Court observe in KTMS Mohd v. Union of India according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the Supreme Court emphasised that merely showing contradictory statements at different stages is not always sufficient for prosecution for false evidence.
It must be established that the person:
INTENTIONALLY GAVE A FALSE STATEMENT
or
FABRICATED FALSE EVIDENCE
for use in a judicial proceeding.
Q47. What is the main principle from KTMS Mohd?
Answer:
CONTRADICTION ALONE ≠ FALSE EVIDENCE
The prosecution must prove intentional falsity.
Q48. Why is this principle important?
Answer:
Because witnesses may contradict themselves because of:
- Mistake;
- Confusion;
- Poor memory;
- Misunderstanding;
- Passage of time.
Not every contradiction is deliberate perjury.
Q49. What must be proved beyond mere contradiction?
Answer:
The relevant intentional falsehood must be established.
Memory
INCONSISTENCY IS EVIDENCE TO EXAMINE, NOT AUTOMATIC GUILT
Q50. What did Fateh Ali v. Queen Empress hold according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, liability requires that the accused be legally bound by oath before a competent authority.
If the Court had no authority to administer the oath, the proceeding would be:
CORAM NON JUDICE
and a prosecution for false evidence would not stand on that basis.
Q51. What does “coram non judice” mean in this context?
Answer:
It refers to proceedings before a body lacking legal jurisdiction.
According to the supplied comments, such acts are treated as legally void.
Q52. Why is jurisdiction important for Section 227?
Answer:
Because the legal obligation relied upon must arise from a competent legal authority.
If the authority itself lacks jurisdiction, the required lawful obligation may not exist in the manner contemplated by the section.
Q53. What did Empress v. Chait Ram hold according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, if the Court is acting beyond its jurisdiction, the charge for false evidence will not be sustained.
Q54. What additional proposition is mentioned in the supplied comments?
Answer:
The comments state that the Court must be an Indian Court; otherwise, according to the supplied commentary, no offence is committed for which the accused could be liable in India under this provision.
Q55. Should mere falsehood be enough for conviction under Section 227?
Answer:
No.
The prosecution must establish both:
- The legal obligation to state the truth; and
- The required knowledge or belief concerning falsity.
Q56. Is motive an essential ingredient?
Answer:
No specific motive such as:
- Financial gain;
- Revenge;
- Malice;
- Personal benefit
is expressly required.
The core is the deliberate false statement under a legal duty of truthfulness.
Q57. Is actual harm required?
Answer:
No.
Actual loss, injury, wrongful conviction, or effect on the outcome is not part of the basic definition under Section 227.
Q58. Is materiality expressly required under Section 227?
Answer:
The supplied statutory text does not require that the false statement itself concern a material point.
This distinguishes Section 227 from the structure of fabricating false evidence under Section 228.
Memory
227 = FALSE STATEMENT UNDER LEGAL DUTY
228 = FABRICATION AIMED AT MATERIAL POINT
Q59. Must the statement be made verbally?
Answer:
No.
Explanation 1 expressly states:
VERBALLY OR OTHERWISE
Q60. Can silence itself amount to giving false evidence?
Answer:
Section 227 is framed around making a statement.
Whether silence attracts some other legal consequence depends on another provision, but silence is not the same thing as making the false statement described here.
Q61. Can a person be guilty if he says something factually true but falsely claims personal knowledge?
Answer:
Yes, depending on the circumstances.
Illustration (d) shows that if A claims to know something when he actually does not know it, he gives false evidence even if the external fact happens to be true.
Q62. Why is that possible?
Answer:
Because the statement being tested is not merely:
“Z was there.”
It is effectively:
“I know Z was there.”
If A has no such knowledge, the statement about his own knowledge is false.
Q63. Can a person be innocent even if his statement turns out factually wrong?
Answer:
Yes.
Illustration (c) shows this clearly.
If A honestly believes the signature is Z’s, he is truthful about his belief even if his belief turns out to be mistaken.
Q64. What is the difference between “false fact” and “false belief statement”?
Answer:
A statement may be false in two ways:
- A person asserts an external fact which he knows or believes is false; or
- A person falsely represents his own belief or knowledge.
Section 227 covers both.
Q65. What is the easiest examination test for Section 227?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was the person legally bound to state the truth or make the declaration?
- Did he make a statement?
- Was that statement false?
- Did he know it was false, believe it false, or not believe it true?
If yes:
SECTION 227 IS ATTRACTED
Q66. How does Section 227 differ from Section 228?
Answer:
Section 227
GIVES FALSE EVIDENCE
The person makes a false statement while legally bound to tell the truth.
Section 228
FABRICATES FALSE EVIDENCE
The person creates false circumstances, entries, documents or electronic records with a specific evidentiary intention.
Memory
227 = LIE
228 = MANUFACTURE
Q67. How does Section 227 relate to Section 229?
Answer:
Section 227:
DEFINES GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
Section 229:
PRESCRIBES THE PUNISHMENT
Memory
227 = DEFINITION
229 = PUNISHMENT
Q68. How does Section 227 differ from Section 233?
Answer:
Section 227
The person:
GIVES FALSE EVIDENCE
Section 233
The person:
CORRUPTLY USES OR ATTEMPTS TO USE FALSE OR FABRICATED EVIDENCE AS TRUE OR GENUINE
Memory
227 = GIVE
233 = USE
Q69. How does Section 227 differ from giving false information under Section 240?
Answer:
Section 227
Requires a legally recognised duty to state the truth.
Section 240
Concerns giving false information respecting an offence committed, subject to its own statutory ingredients.
Memory
227 = LEGALLY BOUND TO TRUTH
240 = FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT OFFENCE
Q70. What is the shortest memory formula for Section 227?
Answer:
“LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK TRUTH + KNOWINGLY MAKE FALSE STATEMENT = 227.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Nature of the Provision
Section 227 is a:
DEFINITION PROVISION
It defines when a person is said to:
GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
The punishment is principally found in Section 229 and aggravated provisions thereafter.
2. Legal Duty
The person must be bound:
BY OATH
or
BY EXPRESS PROVISION OF LAW
to state the truth,
or:
BY LAW TO MAKE A DECLARATION
3. False Statement
The person must make a statement that is:
FALSE
4. Mental Element
The person must:
KNOW IT IS FALSE
or
BELIEVE IT IS FALSE
or
NOT BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE
5. Form of Statement
Under Explanation 1:
VERBAL OR OTHERWISE
6. Statements About Belief
Under Explanation 2, a person may commit the offence by falsely stating:
“I BELIEVE…”
or
“I KNOW…”
when he does not possess that belief or knowledge.
The Five Illustrations — Simplified
Illustration (a): True Case, False Evidence
A lies to support B’s genuine claim.
Lesson
GOOD CASE DOES NOT JUSTIFY FALSE EVIDENCE
Illustration (b): False Claim of Belief
A says he believes a signature is Z’s when he does not.
Lesson
LIE ABOUT BELIEF = FALSE EVIDENCE
Illustration (c): Honest but Mistaken Belief
A genuinely believes a signature is Z’s, though it is not.
Lesson
HONEST MISTAKE ≠ FALSE EVIDENCE
Illustration (d): False Claim of Knowledge
A says he knows Z was at a place although A knows nothing about it.
Lesson
LIE ABOUT KNOWLEDGE = FALSE EVIDENCE
Illustration (e): False Translation
Interpreter knowingly gives a false translation.
Lesson
FALSE INTERPRETATION/TRANSLATION CAN BE FALSE EVIDENCE
Best Illustration Memory
(a) FALSE SUPPORT
(b) FALSE BELIEF
(c) HONEST BELIEF
(d) FALSE KNOWLEDGE
(e) FALSE TRANSLATION
Section 227 vs Section 228
Section 227 — Giving False Evidence
Core:
LEGAL DUTY + FALSE STATEMENT
No requirement that the person manufacture any document or circumstance.
Section 228 — Fabricating False Evidence
Core:
FALSE CREATION + SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY INTENT + MATERIAL POINT
Shortest Distinction
227 = SAY FALSE
228 = CREATE FALSE
Section 227 vs Section 229
Section 227
WHAT IS FALSE EVIDENCE?
Section 229
WHAT IS THE PUNISHMENT?
Section 227 vs Section 240
Section 227
FALSE STATEMENT UNDER LEGAL DUTY TO SPEAK TRUTH
Section 240
FALSE INFORMATION RESPECTING AN OFFENCE COMMITTED
Important Case Notes
KTMS Mohd v. Union of India
According to the supplied comments:
MERE CONTRADICTION AT DIFFERENT STAGES IS NOT ENOUGH
The prosecution must establish intentional falsehood or fabrication.
Memory
CONTRADICTION ≠ AUTOMATIC PERJURY
Fateh Ali v. Queen Empress
According to the supplied comments:
The person must be legally bound by oath before a competent authority.
If the body had no authority to administer the oath:
NO VALID FOUNDATION FOR FALSE-EVIDENCE LIABILITY ON THAT BASIS
Empress v. Chait Ram
According to the supplied comments:
Where the Court acts beyond its jurisdiction, the false-evidence charge cannot be sustained on that proceeding.
Memory
COMPETENT AUTHORITY + VALID JURISDICTION MATTER
Quick Revision Notes
Section
227 BNS
Title
Giving false evidence
IPC Equivalent
Section 191 IPC
Nature
Definition provision.
Legal Obligation
Oath / express provision of law / legal declaration.
Act
Make false statement.
Mental Element
Know false / believe false / do not believe true.
Statement Form
Verbally or otherwise.
Belief Statements
False statements about one’s own belief or knowledge are covered.
Materiality
Not expressly required in the same manner as Section 228.
Punishment
Found principally in Section 229 and aggravated provisions.
BNS Change
No substantive change according to supplied comments.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking oath is always essential
Incorrect.
An express provision of law or legal duty to make a declaration may also create the obligation.
Trap 2 — Thinking every incorrect statement is false evidence
Incorrect.
The required knowledge or belief must be proved.
Trap 3 — Treating contradiction as automatic guilt
Incorrect.
According to the supplied case commentary:
CONTRADICTION ALONE IS NOT ENOUGH
Trap 4 — Thinking statement must be oral
Incorrect.
Explanation 1:
VERBALLY OR OTHERWISE
Trap 5 — Ignoring false claims about belief
A person can give false evidence by claiming a belief he does not actually hold.
Trap 6 — Ignoring false claims about knowledge
A person may give false evidence by claiming knowledge he does not possess.
Trap 7 — Thinking factual truth automatically saves the witness
Incorrect.
Illustration (d) shows that a false claim of personal knowledge may still amount to false evidence even if the external fact happens to be true.
Trap 8 — Thinking factual error automatically creates liability
Incorrect.
Illustration (c) shows:
HONEST MISTAKE ≠ FALSE EVIDENCE
Trap 9 — Thinking a just cause excuses lying
Incorrect.
Illustration (a) shows that false evidence remains false even when used to support a legitimate claim.
Trap 10 — Forgetting competence of authority
According to the supplied cases, the legal authority administering the oath must possess jurisdiction and competence.
Trap 11 — Confusing giving with fabricating
Remember:
227 = GIVE
228 = FABRICATE
Trap 12 — Confusing definition with punishment
Remember:
227 = DEFINITION
229 = PUNISHMENT
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 227–240
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION
Best Memory Sequence
227 = GIVE
228 = FABRICATE
229 = PUNISH
230 = CAPITAL
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL
232 = THREAT
233 = USE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 227
LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE TRUTH
through:
OATH / EXPRESS LAW / LEGAL DECLARATION
+
MAKES FALSE STATEMENT
+
KNOWS FALSE / BELIEVES FALSE / DOES NOT BELIEVE TRUE
= GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
Key Takeaway
Section 227 BNS defines giving false evidence. The essence of the offence is not simply that a person says something incorrect.
The person must first be under a legally recognised obligation to state the truth or make a declaration. He must then make a false statement with the required mental state.
The three most important mental alternatives are:
KNOWS FALSE
BELIEVES FALSE
DOES NOT BELIEVE TRUE
The section also makes clear that:
- Statements may be verbal or otherwise;
- A lie about one’s own belief can amount to false evidence;
- A lie about one’s own knowledge can amount to false evidence;
- Honest mistake does not amount to false evidence;
- Mere contradiction does not automatically establish intentional falsehood;
- Competence and jurisdiction of the authority creating the legal obligation are important according to the supplied cases.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 227 BNS = Section 191 IPC
and the provision has been retained without substantive change.
Final Memory Line
“227 = LEGALLY BOUND TO TELL THE TRUTH + MAKES A FALSE STATEMENT + KNOWS/BELIEVES IT FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE IT TRUE.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Difference Between Giving False Information and Giving False Evidence
Introduction
The concepts of giving false information and giving false evidence may appear similar because both involve statements that are untrue. However, their legal settings and essential ingredients are different.
The distinction can be understood broadly as:
FALSE INFORMATION = FALSE INFORMATION GIVEN OUTSIDE THE STRICT FALSE-EVIDENCE SETTING
whereas:
FALSE EVIDENCE = FALSE STATEMENT MADE WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE THE TRUTH
The supplied comparison refers particularly to:
Giving False Information — Sections 238 and 240 BNS
and
Giving False Evidence — Sections 227, 229, 230, 231 and 232 BNS
Q1. What is the basic difference between giving false information and giving false evidence?
Answer:
The basic distinction lies in the legal setting and obligation of the person making the statement.
Giving False Information
The person supplies false information, commonly outside the strict setting in which he is legally bound to give evidence on oath or otherwise state the truth as evidence.
Giving False Evidence
The person makes a false statement while under a legal obligation to state the truth.
Memory
FALSE INFORMATION = GIVE WRONG INFORMATION
FALSE EVIDENCE = LIE WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK TRUTH
Q2. What is the distinction on the basis of scope?
Answer:
According to the supplied comparison:
Giving False Information
It generally operates:
OUTSIDE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
For example, false information may be supplied to a police officer or another public authority.
Giving False Evidence
It operates in the legally recognised evidentiary setting associated with:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
or other situations where the person is legally bound to state the truth.
Q3. Does false information necessarily have to be given during a Court proceeding?
Answer:
No.
That is one of its important distinctions from false evidence.
False information may be supplied before or outside a Court proceeding.
Q4. Does giving false evidence require a judicial setting?
Answer:
The supplied comparison associates false evidence with judicial proceedings and legally binding evidentiary situations.
The central requirement under the false-evidence concept is that the person is legally bound:
- By oath; or
- By an express provision of law; or
- By law to make a declaration on a particular subject.
Q5. What is the distinction regarding oath?
Answer:
Giving False Information
The information need not necessarily be given:
UNDER OATH
Giving False Evidence
The supplied comparison highlights evidence given under oath or in circumstances where the person is:
LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE THE TRUTH
Q6. Is an oath always necessary for giving false evidence?
Answer:
No.
The more accurate principle is broader than oath alone.
A person may give false evidence where he is legally bound to state the truth even though the obligation does not arise exclusively from an oath.
Memory
OATH OR OTHER LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH
Q7. Is an oath necessary for giving false information?
Answer:
No.
False information may be given without any oath.
For example, false information may be supplied to a public servant in circumstances governed by the relevant statutory provision.
Q8. Which BNS provisions are associated with giving false information in the supplied comparison?
Answer:
The supplied comparison identifies:
SECTION 238 BNS
and
SECTION 240 BNS
Q9. What does Section 238 concern in this context?
Answer:
Section 238 includes, among other conduct, giving false information respecting an offence with the intention of screening an offender from legal punishment.
Thus, its false-information branch requires more than the bare fact that the information is false.
The specific ingredients of Section 238 must be established.
Q10. What does Section 240 concern?
Answer:
Section 240 deals with:
GIVING FALSE INFORMATION RESPECTING AN OFFENCE COMMITTED
The person must know or have reason to believe that an offence has been committed and give information concerning that offence which he knows or believes to be false.
Q11. Which provisions are associated with giving false evidence in the supplied comparison?
Answer:
The image refers to:
SECTION 227
SECTION 229
SECTION 230
SECTION 231
SECTION 232
of the BNS.
These provisions form part of the wider false-evidence framework.
Q12. What is the importance of Section 227?
Answer:
Section 227 contains the central concept of:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
It focuses on a person who is legally bound to state the truth but knowingly makes a false statement within the statutory requirements.
Q13. What is the importance of Section 229?
Answer:
Section 229 provides the general:
PUNISHMENT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
with a distinction between:
- False evidence connected with a judicial proceeding; and
- False evidence in other cases.
Q14. What is the relevance of Sections 230 and 231?
Answer:
These are aggravated false-evidence provisions.
Section 230
False evidence intended to procure conviction for a:
CAPITAL OFFENCE
Section 231
False evidence intended to procure conviction for a serious:
NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE PUNISHABLE WITH LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
Q15. What is the relevance of Section 232?
Answer:
Section 232 deals with:
THREATENING ANOTHER PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Thus, it protects the truthfulness of the evidentiary process against coercion.
Q16. What is the distinction regarding intention according to the supplied comparison?
Answer:
The supplied comparison broadly states:
False Information
The intention may be to:
MISLEAD OR CAUSE ACTION BY A PUBLIC SERVANT
False Evidence
The false statement is directed toward misleading:
A COURT OR JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
However, this must always be read together with the exact ingredients of the particular BNS section involved.
Q17. Is intention to mislead a public servant always required for every false-information offence?
Answer:
Not necessarily in identical terms.
The individual provision controls.
For example:
- Section 238 requires the specific intention to screen an offender in its false-information branch.
- Section 240 requires the specified knowledge concerning the offence and the falsity of the information.
Therefore, the table’s statement should be treated as a broad comparison rather than a substitute for the precise statutory ingredients.
Q18. Is intention to mislead the Court expressly required in every case of giving false evidence?
Answer:
The safer formulation is that the person must satisfy the mental requirements of the false-evidence provision.
Giving false evidence fundamentally involves knowingly making a false statement while legally bound to state the truth.
The statutory ingredients, rather than a broad phrase such as “intent to mislead,” should be applied in an examination problem.
Q19. What example does the supplied comparison give for false information?
Answer:
The supplied comparison uses:
GIVING FAKE INFORMATION TO POLICE
as a simple illustration.
For example, a person knowingly supplies false information concerning an offence to the police in circumstances satisfying the relevant false-information provision.
Q20. What example does the comparison give for false evidence?
Answer:
It gives:
LYING AS A WITNESS IN COURT
as the basic example.
Where a witness is legally bound to state the truth and knowingly gives false evidence, the false-evidence provisions become relevant.
Q21. What is the easiest practical distinction?
Answer:
Ask:
TO WHOM AND IN WHAT LEGAL CAPACITY WAS THE FALSE STATEMENT MADE?
If a person is supplying information to the police or a public authority outside the strict evidentiary obligation:
THINK FALSE INFORMATION
If a person is testifying or otherwise legally bound to state the truth:
THINK FALSE EVIDENCE
Q22. What is the significance of being “legally bound”?
Answer:
It is a particularly important feature of giving false evidence.
The person must be under the relevant legal obligation to:
STATE THE TRUTH
or, where applicable,
MAKE A TRUE DECLARATION
Q23. Is the giver of false information necessarily legally bound to state the truth in the same evidentiary sense?
Answer:
No.
That is one of the major differences.
False-information provisions may operate without the person occupying the formal evidentiary position required for giving false evidence.
Q24. There appears to be a problem in the final row of the supplied table. What is it?
Answer:
Yes. The final row in the supplied image appears to have its two propositions reversed or misplaced.
The image places:
“Accused is legally bound to state the truth, or to make a declaration upon any subject”
under giving false information, while placing:
“Accused is not legally bound to give information”
under giving false evidence.
That appears inconsistent with the distinction established by the preceding row and with the concepts being compared.
For study purposes, the clearer formulation is:
Giving False Evidence
The person is legally bound to state the truth or to make the relevant true declaration.
Giving False Information
Such an evidentiary obligation to state the truth is not necessarily required; liability instead depends upon the particular statutory false-information provision.
Important Exam Note
THE FINAL ROW OF THE IMAGE APPEARS TRANSPOSED
Q25. Why is correcting that apparent transposition important?
Answer:
Because otherwise the table would contradict the very essence of giving false evidence.
The legal obligation to state the truth is one of the defining features distinguishing false evidence from ordinary false information.
Q26. Does every lie to police amount to giving false information under Sections 238 or 240?
Answer:
No.
The precise statutory ingredients must still be proved.
For example, Section 240 requires an actual offence and the specified knowledge concerning both the offence and the falsity of the information.
A mere inaccurate statement does not automatically establish the offence.
Q27. Does every lie in Court amount to giving false evidence?
Answer:
Not automatically.
The statutory requirements of giving false evidence must be satisfied, including the necessary legal obligation and mental element.
Mere mistake, confusion, faulty recollection, or contradiction is not automatically intentional false evidence.
Q28. What is the distinction between false information and fabricated false evidence?
Answer:
These should also not be confused.
False Information
The person communicates information which is false within the relevant statutory provision.
Fabricated False Evidence — Section 228
The person creates:
- A false circumstance;
- False entry;
- False document; or
- False electronic record,
with the specific evidentiary intention required by Section 228.
Memory
FALSE INFORMATION = COMMUNICATE THE LIE
FABRICATION = MANUFACTURE THE EVIDENCE
Q29. How does false information differ from using false evidence under Section 233?
Answer:
False Information
The wrongful act consists in giving information known to be false under the relevant provision.
Section 233
The person:
CORRUPTLY USES OR ATTEMPTS TO USE AS TRUE OR GENUINE
evidence known to be false or fabricated.
Q30. What is the strongest examination distinction between the two concepts?
Answer:
The strongest distinction is:
FALSE INFORMATION = FALSE COMMUNICATION
whereas:
FALSE EVIDENCE = FALSE STATEMENT UNDER LEGAL DUTY TO SPEAK TRUTH
Detailed Distinction in Note Form
1. Scope
Giving False Information
Generally concerns false communication outside the strict judicial evidence setting.
A typical example is false information supplied to a police officer or public servant.
Giving False Evidence
Concerns a person operating within a legally binding evidentiary setting, particularly where evidence is being given and the person is required by law to state the truth.
Memory
INFORMATION = OUTSIDE STRICT EVIDENTIARY ROLE
EVIDENCE = LEGALLY BOUND EVIDENTIARY ROLE
2. Oath and Legal Obligation
Giving False Information
An oath is not necessarily required.
Giving False Evidence
The critical requirement is that the person is legally bound to state the truth.
This may arise through:
- Oath;
- Express legal provision; or
- Another legally recognised duty contemplated by the false-evidence provision.
Memory
FALSE INFO = NO NECESSARY OATH
FALSE EVIDENCE = LEGAL DUTY TO TRUTH
3. Relevant BNS Provisions
Giving False Information
The supplied comparison identifies:
238 AND 240
Giving False Evidence
The supplied comparison identifies:
227, 229, 230, 231 AND 232
4. Purpose or Intent
Giving False Information
Broadly, the false information may be directed at misleading or influencing official action, but the precise mens rea depends on the particular section.
Giving False Evidence
The statement is made within the evidentiary process while the person is legally bound to state the truth.
The exact mental requirements of the applicable false-evidence provision must be proved.
5. Typical Example
Giving False Information
FALSE INFORMATION TO POLICE
Giving False Evidence
FALSE TESTIMONY BY A WITNESS
6. Legal Duty
Giving False Information
The person need not necessarily be under the special evidentiary obligation to state the truth that characterises Section 227.
Giving False Evidence
The person must be:
LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE THE TRUTH
This is the clearer formulation despite the apparent transposition in the supplied image.
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
Giving False Information
Think:
COMMUNICATION OF FALSE INFORMATION
Common context:
POLICE / PUBLIC SERVANT / OFFICIAL AUTHORITY
Oath:
NOT NECESSARILY
Relevant supplied sections:
238 + 240
The exact mens rea varies according to the particular section.
Giving False Evidence
Think:
FALSE STATEMENT WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK TRUTH
Common context:
JUDICIAL / EVIDENTIARY PROCEEDING
Relevant supplied sections:
227 + 229 + 230 + 231 + 232
Important Correction to the Supplied Comparison
The final row appears to have been accidentally reversed.
For revision, use:
FALSE EVIDENCE → LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE TRUTH
and
FALSE INFORMATION → NO NECESSARY EVIDENTIARY DUTY TO STATE TRUTH
This formulation is consistent with the earlier “oath” row and with the conceptual distinction between the two offences.
Quick Revision Notes
Giving False Information
- False communication.
- Generally outside strict judicial evidence setting.
- Need not necessarily be under oath.
- Supplied sections: 238 and 240.
- Typical example: false information to police.
- Exact intent depends upon the applicable provision.
Giving False Evidence
- False evidentiary statement.
- Person legally bound to state the truth.
- Often arises during judicial/evidentiary proceedings.
- Supplied sections: 227, 229, 230, 231 and 232.
- Typical example: witness knowingly lies while giving evidence.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Treating every false statement as false evidence
Incorrect.
False evidence requires the particular legal obligation to state the truth.
Trap 2 — Thinking every false statement to police is automatically Section 240
Incorrect.
The ingredients of Section 240 must still be proved.
Trap 3 — Thinking oath is the only way a person can be legally bound to state truth
Incorrect.
An express legal obligation may also suffice.
Trap 4 — Treating judicial proceedings as the only context in which the wider false-evidence provisions can operate
Be careful.
The definitions and punishment provisions must be read according to their own wording. Section 229 itself distinguishes judicial proceedings from other cases.
Trap 5 — Confusing false information with fabricated evidence
Remember:
FALSE INFORMATION = SAY/GIVE SOMETHING FALSE
FABRICATED EVIDENCE = CREATE FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL
Trap 6 — Confusing false information with use of false evidence
Remember:
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT OFFENCE
233 = USE FALSE/FABRICATED EVIDENCE AS GENUINE
Trap 7 — Following the final row of the supplied image literally
The propositions appear to be transposed.
For study:
LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH → FALSE EVIDENCE
Rapid Revision Sequence
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER, INCLUDING FALSE INFORMATION BRANCH
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT OFFENCE
Best Memory Formula
Giving False Information
FALSE INFORMATION + RELEVANT STATUTORY CONTEXT
Think:
“I GIVE OFFICIALS FALSE INFORMATION.”
Giving False Evidence
LEGAL DUTY TO SPEAK TRUTH + KNOWINGLY FALSE STATEMENT
Think:
“I AM LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK TRUTH, BUT I LIE.”
Key Takeaway
The essential distinction is not merely that both statements are false. It is the legal capacity in which the statement is made.
GIVING FALSE INFORMATION
generally involves supplying false information to an authority without necessarily occupying the formal evidentiary position of a person legally bound to state the truth.
By contrast:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
involves a person who is under the relevant legal obligation to state the truth and nevertheless makes the false statement.
The easiest memory line is:
“FALSE INFORMATION = LIE TO THE AUTHORITY; FALSE EVIDENCE = LIE WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO TELL THE TRUTH.”
And for the supplied image, remember the apparent correction:
THE FINAL ‘LEGALLY BOUND’ ROW APPEARS REVERSED — THE DUTY TO STATE TRUTH BELONGS TO GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE.
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 228: Fabricating False Evidence
Introduction
Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) defines what amounts to fabricating false evidence.
The provision is aimed not merely at a person who tells a lie, but at a person who manufactures a false evidentiary situation with the specific intention that it will appear in a judicial or other legally recognised proceeding and mislead the person deciding the matter on a material point.
Fabrication may take the form of:
- Creating a false circumstance;
- Making a false entry in a book or record;
- Making a false entry in an electronic record;
- Making a document containing a false statement; or
- Making an electronic record containing a false statement.
The central formula is:
FALSE CREATION + INTENDED APPEARANCE IN EVIDENCE + INTENT TO CAUSE ERRONEOUS OPINION ON MATERIAL POINT = FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Q1. What does Section 228 define?
Answer:
Section 228 defines:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
It explains the circumstances in which the creation of false circumstances, entries, documents or electronic records becomes false evidence in the legal sense.
Q2. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 228 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 228 BNS = Section 192 IPC
Q3. What change has been made under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the language remains unchanged except that:
“COURT OF JUSTICE” → “COURT”
Q4. What is the central idea behind Section 228?
Answer:
The section targets the deliberate manufacture of false evidence.
The accused creates something false intending that it will later appear as evidence and cause the decision-maker to form an incorrect opinion concerning a material issue.
Memory
CREATE FALSE → MAKE IT APPEAR AS EVIDENCE → MISLEAD ON MATERIAL POINT
Q5. What are the essential ingredients of fabricating false evidence?
Answer:
The essential ingredients emerging from the supplied provision and comments are:
- The accused creates a false circumstance, entry, document, electronic record or false statement;
- He intends that the fabricated matter may appear in evidence;
- The intended proceeding is one recognised by Section 228;
- He intends that the fabricated matter, when appearing in evidence, will cause a person forming an opinion upon the evidence to entertain an erroneous opinion;
- That erroneous opinion must touch a point material to the result of the proceeding.
Formula
FABRICATION + EVIDENTIARY INTENT + RECOGNISED PROCEEDING + INTENT TO MISLEAD + MATERIAL POINT = SECTION 228
Q6. What are the principal methods of fabricating false evidence?
Answer:
Section 228 covers three broad methods:
First — Creating a False Circumstance
The accused:
CAUSES ANY CIRCUMSTANCE TO EXIST
Second — Making a False Entry
The accused makes a false entry in:
- A book;
- A record; or
- An electronic record.
Third — Making a False Document or Electronic Record
The accused makes:
- A document; or
- An electronic record;
containing a false statement.
Memory
CIRCUMSTANCE – ENTRY – DOCUMENT/ELECTRONIC RECORD
Q7. What does “causing any circumstance to exist” mean?
Answer:
It refers to deliberately creating or arranging a factual situation so that it falsely appears to support a particular conclusion.
The accused is effectively manufacturing a circumstance capable of being treated as evidence.
Q8. Does Section 228 apply only to documents?
Answer:
No.
This is an important examination point.
The provision expressly extends beyond documents to:
ANY CIRCUMSTANCE
Therefore, physical situations may also be fabricated.
Q9. Can physical evidence be fabricated?
Answer:
Yes.
Illustration (a) demonstrates this.
A places jewels into Z’s box intending that they be discovered there and that the circumstance cause Z to be convicted of theft.
The jewels and their placement create a false evidentiary circumstance.
Q10. Can a false entry in a book amount to fabrication?
Answer:
Yes.
A false entry in a book or record is expressly covered.
Q11. Are electronic records covered?
Answer:
Yes.
Section 228 expressly refers to:
ELECTRONIC RECORD
Thus, the provision is not restricted to paper records.
Q12. Can a document containing a false statement constitute fabricated evidence?
Answer:
Yes.
Making a document containing a false statement is expressly included where the other statutory ingredients are satisfied.
Q13. Does every false document amount to fabricated false evidence?
Answer:
No.
This is a crucial distinction.
According to the supplied comments:
MERE GENERATION OF FALSE EVIDENCE IS NOT ENOUGH
The required intention concerning its appearance in evidence and misleading effect must also exist.
Q14. Why is intention so important under Section 228?
Answer:
Because fabrication is not established merely by showing that something false was created.
The accused must have the specific evidentiary intention required by Section 228.
Memory
FALSE CREATION ALONE ≠ SECTION 228
Q15. What is the first specific intention required?
Answer:
The accused must intend that the false circumstance, entry or statement:
MAY APPEAR IN EVIDENCE
in one of the proceedings specified by the section.
Q16. What is the second specific intention involved?
Answer:
The accused must intend that the false material, when appearing in evidence, may cause the person forming an opinion upon that evidence:
TO ENTERTAIN AN ERRONEOUS OPINION
Q17. What must that erroneous opinion concern?
Answer:
It must touch:
A POINT MATERIAL TO THE RESULT OF THE PROCEEDING
Materiality is therefore a central ingredient.
Q18. What does “material point” mean in the context of Section 228?
Answer:
It refers to a point important to the result of the proceeding.
According to the supplied comments, examples include matters bearing upon:
- Guilt;
- Innocence;
- Liability; or
- Another important issue affecting the outcome.
Q19. Is an irrelevant falsehood sufficient?
Answer:
Not merely because it is false.
The statutory structure requires the intended erroneous opinion to touch a:
MATERIAL POINT
Q20. Who must the accused intend to mislead?
Answer:
The provision refers broadly to:
ANY PERSON WHO IN SUCH PROCEEDING IS TO FORM AN OPINION UPON THE EVIDENCE
The focus is therefore on the person who must evaluate the evidence in the proceeding.
Q21. Is a Judge the only person who can be misled for Section 228?
Answer:
No.
The wording is broader than merely referring to a Judge.
The relevant person is one who, in the proceeding, is to form an opinion upon the evidence.
Q22. In what proceedings may the fabricated evidence be intended to appear?
Answer:
Section 228 identifies three settings:
- A judicial proceeding;
- A proceeding taken by law before a public servant as such;
- A proceeding before an arbitrator.
Memory
COURT/JUDICIAL – PUBLIC SERVANT – ARBITRATOR
Q23. Is fabrication restricted to judicial proceedings?
Answer:
No.
The statutory definition is wider.
It also covers the relevant legally taken proceedings before:
- A public servant; and
- An arbitrator.
Q24. Why is the reference to an arbitrator important?
Answer:
It shows that fabricated false evidence is not restricted to ordinary Court litigation.
The provision expressly recognises proceedings before an arbitrator.
Q25. What is meant by a proceeding before a public servant?
Answer:
The provision refers specifically to:
A PROCEEDING TAKEN BY LAW BEFORE A PUBLIC SERVANT AS SUCH
Therefore, the proceeding must have the required legal character.
Q26. Is any informal conversation with a public servant enough?
Answer:
Not merely because a public servant is involved.
The supplied statutory wording requires a:
PROCEEDING TAKEN BY LAW
before the public servant acting as such.
Q27. Must fabricated evidence actually be produced before the Court or authority?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments:
MERE PREPARATION WITH THE REQUIRED INTENT MAY SUFFICE
The fabricated material need not actually be used.
Q28. Why is actual use unnecessary?
Answer:
Because Section 228 focuses on the intention that the false circumstance, entry or statement:
“MAY APPEAR IN EVIDENCE”
Once fabrication is completed with the required intention, subsequent actual use is not necessary according to the supplied comments.
Q29. Must a judicial proceeding already have commenced?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments:
COMMENCEMENT OF THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDING IS NOT MANDATORY
The evidence may be fabricated in advance.
Q30. When is the offence complete?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, once the fabrication has been completed with the necessary statutory intention, the offence is established.
Memory
FABRICATION COMPLETE + REQUIRED INTENTION = OFFENCE COMPLETE
Q31. Can evidence therefore be fabricated before litigation begins?
Answer:
Yes.
For example, a person may manufacture a false document today intending to produce it in proceedings that are expected later.
If the statutory intentions are established, the fact that proceedings have not yet commenced does not by itself prevent Section 228 from applying.
Q32. What does Illustration (a) provide?
Answer:
A puts jewels into a box belonging to Z.
A intends:
- That the jewels will be found in Z’s box; and
- That this circumstance will cause Z to be convicted of theft.
A has fabricated false evidence.
Q33. What principle does Illustration (a) demonstrate?
Answer:
It demonstrates:
FABRICATION OF A PHYSICAL CIRCUMSTANCE
No false document is necessary.
A deliberately creates a misleading physical situation.
Q34. Why is placing the jewels in Z’s box more than mere possession of stolen property?
Answer:
For the purpose of Section 228, the important point is A’s deliberate creation of a false evidentiary circumstance intended to appear as evidence against Z and lead to an erroneous conclusion regarding Z’s guilt.
Q35. What does Illustration (b) provide?
Answer:
A makes a false entry in his shop-book for the purpose of using it as corroborative evidence in a Court.
A has fabricated false evidence.
Q36. What principle does Illustration (b) demonstrate?
Answer:
It demonstrates:
FALSE ENTRY + INTENDED COURT USE = FABRICATION
provided the other statutory requirements are satisfied.
Q37. Does the false shop-book entry have to be actually produced in Court?
Answer:
No.
The Illustration focuses on the purpose for which the entry was created.
The supplied comments similarly state that actual use is unnecessary.
Q38. What does Illustration (c) provide?
Answer:
A intends to cause Z to be convicted of criminal conspiracy.
A:
- Writes a letter imitating Z’s handwriting;
- Makes it appear that the letter was addressed to an accomplice;
- Places the letter somewhere police officers are likely to search.
A has fabricated false evidence.
Q39. What principle does Illustration (c) demonstrate?
Answer:
It demonstrates deliberate manufacture and strategic placement of false documentary evidence.
Sequence
FALSE LETTER → IMITATE HANDWRITING → PLANT LETTER → EXPECT DISCOVERY → FALSE INFERENCE OF GUILT
Q40. Why is Illustration (c) particularly useful?
Answer:
Because it shows that fabrication may involve more than merely writing something false.
The accused may deliberately arrange for the false material to be discovered so that it appears naturally as genuine evidence.
Q41. What example is given in the supplied comments concerning a loan dispute?
Answer:
A forges a letter purporting to have been written by B in which B admits liability in a loan dispute.
A then produces the letter in Court as evidence.
According to the supplied comments, A has fabricated false evidence.
Q42. What does the loan-letter example demonstrate?
Answer:
It illustrates:
FALSE DOCUMENT + FALSE ADMISSION + INTENDED EVIDENTIARY USE + MATERIAL LIABILITY ISSUE
The false admission is intended to mislead the Court regarding B’s liability.
Q43. What example is given concerning a forged medical report?
Answer:
A bribes a doctor to prepare a fake medical certificate stating that A was in hospital on the day a crime was committed.
A plans to produce it in Court as an alibi.
According to the supplied comments, this constitutes fabricating false evidence.
Q44. Why is the fake medical report material?
Answer:
Because it is intended to support an alibi and therefore influence the decision-maker’s opinion regarding A’s possible involvement in the offence.
The false evidence concerns a matter material to guilt or innocence.
Q45. What if A prepares the false medical report but is arrested before producing it?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, actual production is unnecessary.
If fabrication was completed with the required evidentiary intention:
SECTION 228 MAY ALREADY BE COMPLETE
Q46. What if a false document is created merely as a joke with no intention of using it as evidence?
Answer:
The mere falsity would not, by itself, satisfy Section 228.
The required evidentiary intention is essential.
Q47. What if a false record is made for an unrelated private purpose?
Answer:
Again, falsity alone does not automatically establish fabrication of false evidence.
There must be the required intention connecting the false material to its appearance in evidence and its misleading effect on a material point.
Q48. Is actual deception of the Court necessary?
Answer:
No.
The statutory definition focuses on the accused’s intention that the false material may cause the person considering the evidence to entertain an erroneous opinion.
Actual success is not expressly required.
Q49. Must the Judge actually believe the fabricated evidence?
Answer:
No.
The offence does not depend upon whether the intended decision-maker is actually fooled.
Q50. Must the fabricated evidence actually alter the result of the proceeding?
Answer:
No.
The statutory focus is on the intention that it may cause an erroneous opinion touching a point material to the result.
Actual alteration of the final result is not expressly required.
Q51. Is financial gain an ingredient?
Answer:
No.
The provision does not require financial benefit.
Q52. Is actual injury to another person required?
Answer:
No separate requirement of actual injury is stated.
The offence concerns the deliberate corruption of the evidentiary process.
Q53. Is dishonest intention expressly required?
Answer:
The provision does not use “dishonestly” as the central mens rea.
Instead, it specifies the particular intention concerning:
- Appearance of the fabricated matter in evidence; and
- Creation of an erroneous opinion on a material point.
Q54. Is malicious intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The specific evidentiary intention described by Section 228 is the controlling requirement.
Q55. Why is intention described in the comments as a “prime ingredient”?
Answer:
Because discrepancies, contradictions or inaccuracies do not automatically establish deliberate fabrication.
There must be evidence of the particular intention required by the section.
Q56. Does every discrepancy in evidence amount to fabrication?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments, discrepancies or contradictions in evidence do not automatically amount to intentional deception or fabrication.
Important Principle
CONTRADICTION ≠ AUTOMATIC FABRICATION
Q57. Why is this distinction important?
Answer:
Witnesses and records may contain inconsistencies for many reasons.
Section 228 targets deliberate manufacture of false evidence with a specific evidentiary purpose, not every mistake or inconsistency.
Q58. What is the relationship between Section 228 and Section 229?
Answer:
Section 228:
DEFINES FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Section 229:
PRESCRIBES PUNISHMENT FOR GIVING OR FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Memory
228 = DEFINITION
229 = PUNISHMENT
Q59. What punishment does Section 229 provide for fabrication connected with a judicial proceeding?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments and Section 229(1):
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 7 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹10,000
where the false evidence is fabricated for the purpose of being used at any stage of a judicial proceeding.
Q60. What punishment applies in cases other than those under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
According to Section 229(2):
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 3 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹5,000
Q61. Why does Section 229 impose a higher punishment for judicial proceedings?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the seven-year punishment demonstrates the legislative intention to treat false evidence affecting judicial proceedings as a serious offence.
Q62. What is a “judicial proceeding” according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
The supplied comments refer to Section 2(m) of the BNSS, under which:
“JUDICIAL PROCEEDING” INCLUDES ANY PROCEEDING IN THE COURSE OF WHICH EVIDENCE IS OR MAY BE LEGALLY TAKEN ON OATH
Q63. What does Section 229 Explanation 1 add?
Answer:
It provides that:
A TRIAL BEFORE A COURT-MARTIAL IS A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Q64. What does Section 229 Explanation 2 add?
Answer:
An investigation:
- Directed by law;
- Preliminary to a proceeding before a Court;
is treated as a stage of a judicial proceeding even if the investigation itself does not occur before the Court.
Q65. What does Section 229 Explanation 3 add?
Answer:
An investigation:
- Directed by a Court according to law; and
- Conducted under the authority of a Court;
is a stage of a judicial proceeding even though it takes place outside the Court.
Q66. Can an officer deputed by a Court conduct a proceeding relevant to these provisions?
Answer:
Yes.
According to the supplied comments, officers deputed by Courts to enquire into evidence, whether concerning a statement or document, may conduct proceedings falling within this extended concept of judicial proceeding.
Q67. How does Section 228 differ from Section 227?
Answer:
The distinction can be expressed in note form.
Section 227 — Giving False Evidence
The central wrong is:
MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO STATE THE TRUTH
Section 228 — Fabricating False Evidence
The central wrong is:
CREATING FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL OR CIRCUMSTANCES WITH SPECIFIC INTENT TO MISLEAD ON A MATERIAL POINT
Shortest Memory
227 = LIE
228 = MANUFACTURE
Q68. Is being bound by oath essential under Section 228?
Answer:
No.
Unlike giving false evidence, fabrication does not depend on the fabricator being under an oath or equivalent obligation to state the truth.
Q69. Is an existing proceeding essential under Section 228?
Answer:
No.
This is one of its most important characteristics.
Evidence can be fabricated in anticipation of later proceedings.
Q70. What is the best examination formula for Section 228?
Answer:
Use this five-stage test:
1. CREATE SOMETHING FALSE
2. INTEND IT TO APPEAR IN EVIDENCE
3. IN A RECOGNISED LEGAL PROCEEDING
4. INTEND IT TO CAUSE AN ERRONEOUS OPINION
5. ON A MATERIAL POINT
If these requirements are established:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE = SECTION 228
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Nature of the Offence
Section 228 is primarily a:
DEFINITION PROVISION
It defines what it means to:
FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
The punishment is principally dealt with under Section 229.
2. Three Forms of Fabrication
The accused may:
(a) Cause a False Circumstance to Exist
Example:
PLANT JEWELS
(b) Make a False Entry
Example:
FALSE SHOP-BOOK ENTRY
(c) Make a False Document/Electronic Record
Example:
FORGED LETTER OR FALSE MEDICAL RECORD
Memory
CIRCUMSTANCE – ENTRY – DOCUMENT
3. Required Evidentiary Intention
The accused must intend that the fabricated matter:
MAY APPEAR IN EVIDENCE
This is indispensable.
4. Recognised Proceedings
The intended evidence may appear in:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
PROCEEDING TAKEN BY LAW BEFORE PUBLIC SERVANT
PROCEEDING BEFORE ARBITRATOR
5. Intended Effect
The fabricated evidence must be intended to cause the decision-maker:
TO ENTERTAIN AN ERRONEOUS OPINION
6. Materiality
The erroneous opinion must concern:
A POINT MATERIAL TO THE RESULT
7. Actual Use Not Necessary
According to the supplied comments:
FABRICATION + REQUIRED INTENTION IS SUFFICIENT
Actual production of the evidence is unnecessary.
8. Existing Judicial Proceeding Not Necessary
The evidence may be fabricated before the proceeding commences.
Memory
PREPARE NOW → USE LATER
The Three Statutory Illustrations
Illustration (a) — Planting Jewels
FALSE PHYSICAL CIRCUMSTANCE
A plants jewels in Z’s box to make Z appear guilty of theft.
Illustration (b) — False Shop-Book Entry
FALSE RECORD ENTRY
A creates a false entry intending to use it as corroborative evidence in Court.
Illustration (c) — Forged Letter
FALSE DOCUMENT + PLANTING
A imitates Z’s handwriting, creates a false conspiracy letter and places it where police are likely to discover it.
Illustration Memory Formula
JEWELS = CIRCUMSTANCE
SHOP-BOOK = ENTRY
LETTER = DOCUMENT
These three illustrations neatly correspond to the major methods of fabrication.
Section 227 vs Section 228
Section 227 — Giving False Evidence
Think:
FALSE STATEMENT
The person is legally bound to state the truth and nevertheless makes the false statement with the required mental state.
Section 228 — Fabricating False Evidence
Think:
FALSE CREATION
The person manufactures a circumstance, entry, document or electronic record with the specific evidentiary intention required by the provision.
Best Distinction
227 = PERSON LIES
228 = PERSON CREATES THE LIE AS EVIDENCE
Section 228 vs Section 233
This distinction is also important.
Section 228
FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
The emphasis is on creation.
Section 233
CORRUPTLY USE OR ATTEMPT TO USE FALSE/FABRICATED EVIDENCE
The emphasis is on subsequent use.
Memory
228 = MAKE
233 = USE
Quick Revision Notes
Section
228 BNS
Title
Fabricating false evidence
IPC Equivalent
Section 192 IPC
Nature
Definition of fabricating false evidence.
Acts
Create false circumstance, false entry, false document or false electronic record.
First Intention
Fabricated matter may appear in evidence.
Proceedings
Judicial proceeding; proceeding taken by law before public servant; proceeding before arbitrator.
Second Intention
Cause person forming opinion on evidence to entertain an erroneous opinion.
Materiality
Erroneous opinion must touch a point material to the result.
Actual Use
Not necessary according to supplied comments.
Existing Proceeding
Not necessary according to supplied comments.
Punishment
Governed by Section 229 according to the nature of the proceeding.
BNS Change
“Court of Justice” replaced with “Court.”
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every false document is fabricated false evidence
Incorrect.
FALSE DOCUMENT + NO EVIDENTIARY INTENT ≠ AUTOMATIC SECTION 228
Trap 2 — Requiring actual production in Court
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments, fabrication may be complete before actual use.
Trap 3 — Requiring proceedings already to have commenced
Incorrect.
Evidence may be manufactured in anticipation of proceedings.
Trap 4 — Limiting fabrication to documents
Incorrect.
Section 228 includes:
CIRCUMSTANCES
ENTRIES
DOCUMENTS
ELECTRONIC RECORDS
Trap 5 — Forgetting materiality
The intended erroneous opinion must touch:
A MATERIAL POINT
Trap 6 — Forgetting the second intention
It is not enough that the material is intended to appear in evidence.
It must also be intended to cause an erroneous opinion on a material point.
Trap 7 — Thinking only Courts are covered
Incorrect.
The section also expressly covers proceedings before:
PUBLIC SERVANT AS SUCH
and
ARBITRATOR
Trap 8 — Requiring the fabricator to be under oath
Incorrect.
That distinction belongs to the concept of giving false evidence.
Trap 9 — Treating ordinary contradictions as fabrication
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments:
MERE DISCREPANCY OR CONTRADICTION ≠ INTENTIONAL FABRICATION
The required intention must be established.
Trap 10 — Confusing creation with use
Remember:
228 = FABRICATE
233 = USE
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 227–237
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
228 = FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
229 = PUNISH FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR LIFE / 7+ CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE/SIGN FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
Best Memory Sequence
227 = GIVE
228 = FABRICATE
229 = PUNISH
230 = CAPITAL
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL
232 = THREAT
233 = USE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 228
CREATE
a false:
CIRCUMSTANCE / ENTRY / DOCUMENT / ELECTRONIC RECORD
+
INTEND IT TO APPEAR IN EVIDENCE
before a:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING / PUBLIC SERVANT / ARBITRATOR
+
INTEND TO CAUSE AN ERRONEOUS OPINION
+
MATERIAL POINT
= FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Key Takeaway
Section 228 BNS is fundamentally about:
MANUFACTURING EVIDENCE RATHER THAN MERELY TELLING A LIE
The accused must create a false circumstance, entry, document or electronic record with the specific intention that it may appear as evidence in a legally recognised proceeding and cause the person evaluating that evidence to form an erroneous opinion on a matter material to the result.
Actual use is not necessary according to the supplied comments, and the proceeding need not already have commenced. The critical element is the specific evidentiary intention at the time of fabrication.
The statutory illustrations provide the easiest memory device:
PLANTED JEWELS = FALSE CIRCUMSTANCE
FALSE SHOP-BOOK = FALSE ENTRY
FORGED CONSPIRACY LETTER = FALSE DOCUMENT
According to the supplied comments:
Section 228 BNS = Section 192 IPC
with:
“COURT OF JUSTICE” → “COURT”
The punishment is then governed by Section 229, with the more serious punishment applying to fabrication intended for use in a judicial proceeding.
Final Memory Line
“228 = CREATE FALSE EVIDENCE + INTEND IT TO APPEAR IN A LEGAL PROCEEDING + INTEND IT TO MISLEAD ON A MATERIAL POINT.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Distinction Between Giving False Evidence and Fabricating False Evidence
Introduction
The supplied comparison distinguishes two closely related offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita:
Section 227 BNS — Giving False Evidence
and
Section 228 BNS — Fabricating False Evidence
Although both deal with false evidence and ultimately protect the administration of justice, their essential ingredients are different.
The most useful starting distinction is:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE = FALSE STATEMENT BY A PERSON LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK THE TRUTH
whereas:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE = CREATING A FALSE CIRCUMSTANCE, ENTRY, DOCUMENT OR STATEMENT WITH A SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY PURPOSE
Q1. What is the basic distinction between giving and fabricating false evidence?
Answer:
In giving false evidence, the focus is on a person who is legally bound to state the truth but makes a false statement.
In fabricating false evidence, the focus is on creating false evidentiary material or circumstances with the specific intention that they appear in evidence and cause an erroneous opinion on a material point.
Memory
227 = FALSE STATEMENT
228 = FALSE CREATION
Q2. Which BNS sections deal with these two concepts?
Answer:
Section 227 = Giving False Evidence
Section 228 = Fabricating False Evidence
These concepts are important for understanding the punishment provisions beginning with Section 229.
Q3. What is the distinction on the basis of intention?
Answer:
According to the supplied comparison:
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
Only the general intention involved in knowingly making a false statement while legally bound to state the truth is required.
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
A:
SPECIFIC INTENTION
is required.
The fabricated material must be created for the particular evidentiary purpose contemplated by the provision.
Q4. Why is specific intention particularly important in fabrication?
Answer:
Because merely creating something false does not automatically amount to fabricating false evidence.
The false circumstance, entry, document, or statement must be created with the required purpose connected with its appearance or use in evidence and its effect upon a material point.
Thus:
FALSE CREATION ALONE ≠ FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
The specific evidentiary intention is essential.
Q5. What is the distinction regarding being “bound by law”?
Answer:
This is a major difference.
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
The offence is committed by a person who is under a legal obligation to state the truth.
The supplied comparison highlights a person bound:
- By an oath; or
- By an express provision of law.
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
Such a legal obligation is:
NOT NECESSARY
for fabrication.
Q6. Why is being legally bound important for giving false evidence?
Answer:
Because the essence of giving false evidence is that a person who is legally required to speak truthfully nevertheless makes a statement falling within the false-evidence provision.
Without the required legal obligation, the particular offence of giving false evidence under Section 227 is not established merely because something untrue was said.
Q7. Must a fabricator be under oath?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comparison, being bound by oath or equivalent legal obligation is not necessary for fabricating false evidence.
Memory
227 = LEGAL DUTY TO SPEAK TRUTH
228 = NO SUCH DUTY REQUIRED
Q8. What is the distinction regarding a material point?
Answer:
According to the supplied comparison:
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
The false statement need not itself be made on a material point.
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
The fabrication must relate to the required:
MATERIAL POINT
This is an important examination distinction.
Q9. Why is materiality particularly important in fabrication?
Answer:
Because fabrication is directed toward creating a false evidentiary picture capable of causing a person who forms an opinion upon the evidence to entertain an erroneous opinion touching a material point.
Therefore, the connection with materiality forms part of the special structure of fabrication.
Q10. Does every false statement by a witness have to concern the ultimate issue in the case?
Answer:
According to the supplied comparison, no.
For giving false evidence, the false statement need not itself be on a material point in the same manner required for fabrication.
The central question is whether the statutory ingredients of giving false evidence are satisfied.
Q11. What is the distinction regarding proceedings?
Answer:
According to the supplied comparison:
Giving False Evidence
There should be the relevant proceeding or legal setting in which the person is bound to state the truth.
Fabricating False Evidence
An existing proceeding is:
NOT ESSENTIAL
The fabrication may occur before the evidence is actually introduced into a proceeding.
Q12. Why need a proceeding not already exist for fabrication?
Answer:
Because fabricated evidence may be prepared in anticipation of later use.
For example, a person may create false evidentiary material intending that it later appear in evidence.
The offence therefore focuses heavily on:
CREATION + SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY INTENTION
rather than requiring the false material already to have been presented.
Q13. Does giving false evidence generally involve an actual statement?
Answer:
Yes.
Its central feature is the making of a false statement by a person under the relevant legal obligation to state the truth.
Q14. Does fabrication necessarily require oral testimony?
Answer:
No.
Fabrication is conceptually broader because it concerns the creation of false evidentiary circumstances or material.
Memory
GIVING = SAYING / MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT
FABRICATING = CREATING FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL OR CIRCUMSTANCES
Q15. Give a simple example of giving false evidence.
Answer:
A is legally bound to state the truth in a proceeding.
A knowingly makes a false statement.
The issue is one of:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 227
Q16. Give a simple example of fabricating false evidence.
Answer:
A deliberately creates a false evidentiary circumstance intending that it later appear in evidence and cause the decision-maker to form an erroneous opinion on a material point.
The issue is one of:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 228
Q17. What is the easiest factual question for distinguishing the two?
Answer:
Ask:
DID THE PERSON LIE WHILE LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK THE TRUTH?
If yes, think:
SECTION 227
Then ask:
DID THE PERSON CREATE FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL/CIRCUMSTANCES FOR A SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY PURPOSE?
If yes, think:
SECTION 228
Q18. Which offence requires a more specific evidentiary purpose?
Answer:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 228
This is one of the most important distinctions in the supplied material.
Q19. Which offence requires the person to be legally bound to state the truth?
Answer:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 227
Q20. Which offence can potentially occur before the relevant proceeding begins?
Answer:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 228
because an existing proceeding is not essential according to the supplied comparison.
Q21. Which offence places particular importance on a material point?
Answer:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE — SECTION 228
The supplied comparison specifically distinguishes fabrication on this basis.
Q22. Can the same overall scheme involve both giving and fabricating false evidence?
Answer:
Potentially, yes.
Different conduct within the same scheme may satisfy different statutory requirements.
For example, one act may involve creating false evidentiary material, while another act may involve knowingly making a false statement under a legal obligation to tell the truth.
Each offence must nevertheless be tested according to its own ingredients.
Detailed Distinction in Note Form
1. Nature of the Act
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
The focus is on:
MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT
while under the relevant legal obligation to state the truth.
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
The focus is on:
CREATING FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL OR CIRCUMSTANCES
for the specific evidentiary purpose contemplated by law.
Memory
227 = FALSE SPEECH/STATEMENT
228 = FALSE CREATION
2. Intention
Giving False Evidence
According to the supplied comparison, the general intention involved in knowingly making the false statement is sufficient.
Fabricating False Evidence
A:
SPECIFIC INTENTION
is necessary.
The fabrication must be directed toward its evidentiary use and the erroneous opinion contemplated by the provision.
Memory
GIVING = GENERAL INTENTION
FABRICATING = SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY INTENTION
3. Legal Obligation
Giving False Evidence
The person must be under the relevant legal obligation to state the truth, including the situation highlighted in the supplied material where the person is bound:
BY OATH
or
BY EXPRESS PROVISION OF LAW
Fabricating False Evidence
No equivalent requirement is necessary.
Memory
227 = BOUND TO TRUTH
228 = NEED NOT BE BOUND
4. Material Point
Giving False Evidence
According to the supplied comparison:
THE FALSE STATEMENT NEED NOT ITSELF BE ON A MATERIAL POINT
Fabricating False Evidence
The statutory structure requires the fabrication to be connected with:
A MATERIAL POINT
Memory
227 = MATERIALITY NOT REQUIRED IN THE SAME WAY
228 = MATERIAL POINT IMPORTANT
5. Existing Proceeding
Giving False Evidence
There must be the relevant legal setting in which the person is bound to state the truth.
Fabricating False Evidence
According to the supplied comparison:
AN EXISTING PROCEEDING IS NOT ESSENTIAL
The fabrication can precede its eventual evidentiary use.
Memory
227 = FALSE STATEMENT IN LEGALLY BINDING SETTING
228 = FALSE EVIDENCE MAY BE PREPARED IN ADVANCE
6. Core Wrongdoing
Giving False Evidence
The wrongdoing is:
VIOLATION OF A LEGAL DUTY TO STATE THE TRUTH
Fabricating False Evidence
The wrongdoing is:
MANUFACTURING A FALSE EVIDENTIARY PICTURE
with the specific purpose required by the section.
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
The distinction can be reduced to four major examination points.
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
Remember:
FALSE STATEMENT
LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH
GENERAL INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD
NO IDENTICAL MATERIAL-POINT REQUIREMENT
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
Remember:
FALSE CREATION
NO NEED TO BE BOUND BY OATH/LEGAL DUTY
SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY INTENTION
MATERIAL POINT
EXISTING PROCEEDING NOT ESSENTIAL
Quick Revision Notes
Giving False Evidence — Section 227
The person is legally bound to state the truth but makes a false statement.
Think:
“I AM BOUND TO SPEAK THE TRUTH, BUT I LIE.”
Fabricating False Evidence — Section 228
The person creates false evidentiary material or circumstances with the required specific intention.
Think:
“I CREATE SOMETHING FALSE SO THAT IT WILL OPERATE AS EVIDENCE.”
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Treating giving and fabricating false evidence as identical
They are separate concepts with different ingredients.
Trap 2 — Requiring the fabricator to be under oath
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comparison, that requirement is unnecessary for fabrication.
Trap 3 — Forgetting specific intention in Section 228
Fabrication requires the particular evidentiary intention contemplated by the provision.
Trap 4 — Assuming fabricated evidence must already have been used
Incorrect.
An existing proceeding is not essential according to the supplied comparison.
Trap 5 — Assuming every lie amounts to giving false evidence
Incorrect.
The required legal obligation to state the truth is central to Section 227.
Trap 6 — Ignoring materiality in fabrication
The material-point requirement is particularly important under Section 228.
Trap 7 — Thinking fabrication means only making a false document
Too narrow.
The concept can extend to the creation of false evidentiary circumstances or material within the statutory definition.
Trap 8 — Confusing fabrication with later use
Remember the sequence:
228 = FABRICATE
233 = CORRUPTLY USE FALSE/FABRICATED EVIDENCE
Connection with Section 229
Once the distinction between Sections 227 and 228 is understood, Section 229 becomes easier.
Section 229 punishes:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
and
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
The punishment then depends on whether the conduct concerns a judicial proceeding or another case.
Memory
227 = WHAT IS GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE?
228 = WHAT IS FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE?
229 = HOW IS FALSE EVIDENCE PUNISHED?
Rapid Revision Sequence
227 = GIVE
228 = FABRICATE
229 = PUNISH
230 = CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL CONVICTION
232 = THREAT
233 = USE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
Ultimate Memory Formula
Section 227 — Giving False Evidence
LEGAL DUTY TO STATE TRUTH
+
FALSE STATEMENT
+
REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE/BELIEF
= GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
Section 228 — Fabricating False Evidence
CREATE FALSE CIRCUMSTANCE / ENTRY / DOCUMENT / STATEMENT
+
SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY INTENTION
+
ERRONEOUS OPINION
+
MATERIAL POINT
= FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Key Takeaway
The most important distinction is conceptual:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE = LYING WHEN LEGALLY BOUND TO SPEAK THE TRUTH
whereas:
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE = CREATING FALSE EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL OR CIRCUMSTANCES FOR A SPECIFIC EVIDENTIARY PURPOSE
The four strongest examination distinctions from the supplied comparison are:
First, giving false evidence requires the relevant legal obligation to state the truth; fabrication does not.
Second, giving false evidence involves the intentional false statement, whereas fabrication requires a more specific evidentiary intention.
Third, the material-point requirement is particularly relevant to fabricated evidence.
Fourth, fabrication need not wait for an existing proceeding; false evidence may be manufactured in advance for its intended evidentiary use.
Final Memory Line
“227 = BOUND TO TRUTH BUT LIES; 228 = CREATES FALSE EVIDENCE FOR A SPECIFIC MATERIAL PURPOSE.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 229: Punishment for False Evidence
Introduction
Section 229 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) prescribes the punishment for intentionally giving or fabricating false evidence.
The provision distinguishes between:
- False evidence connected with a judicial proceeding; and
- False evidence given or fabricated in other cases.
The punishment is more severe when the false evidence is connected with a judicial proceeding.
The section also explains that the expression “stage of a judicial proceeding” extends beyond the courtroom itself and can include certain legally authorised investigations and enquiries.
The central structure is:
FALSE EVIDENCE IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDING = SECTION 229(1)
FALSE EVIDENCE IN OTHER CASES = SECTION 229(2)
Q1. What does Section 229 deal with?
Answer:
Section 229 deals with the punishment for:
- Intentionally giving false evidence; or
- Fabricating false evidence.
The punishment depends on whether the false evidence is connected with a judicial proceeding or falls outside that category.
Q2. How many sub-sections does Section 229 contain?
Answer:
There are two main punishment provisions:
- Section 229(1) — false evidence connected with a judicial proceeding;
- Section 229(2) — false evidence in cases other than those covered by sub-section (1).
Q3. What does Section 229(1) punish?
Answer:
Section 229(1) punishes a person who:
- Intentionally gives false evidence at any stage of a judicial proceeding; or
- Fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used at any stage of a judicial proceeding.
Q4. What are the two acts covered by Section 229(1)?
Answer:
The two acts are:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
and
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Q5. Must both giving and fabricating occur?
Answer:
No.
They are alternative modes of committing the offence.
Either may attract Section 229(1).
Q6. What is the mental element for giving false evidence under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
The provision states:
INTENTIONALLY GIVES FALSE EVIDENCE
Therefore, intentional falsity is essential.
Q7. Is accidental false evidence punishable under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
Not merely because it is factually wrong.
The section expressly requires intentional giving of false evidence.
Q8. Is negligence enough?
Answer:
No.
Mere carelessness, confusion, poor memory, or mistake does not automatically amount to intentionally giving false evidence.
Q9. What additional requirement applies to fabricated evidence under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
The false evidence must be fabricated:
FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING USED IN ANY STAGE OF A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Thus, the intended use of the fabricated material is important.
Q10. Must fabricated evidence actually be used?
Answer:
The wording focuses on fabrication:
FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING USED
Therefore, actual successful use is not expressly required if the fabrication was done for that purpose.
Q11. What is the punishment under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 7 YEARS
and shall also be liable to:
FINE UP TO ₹10,000
Q12. Is the fine ceiling fixed?
Answer:
Yes.
According to the supplied comments, BNS fixes the maximum fine under Section 229(1) at:
₹10,000
Q13. What is the classification of Section 229(1)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Bailable
- Magistrate of the First Class
Q14. Is Section 229(1) cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q15. Is Section 229(1) bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
BAILABLE
Q16. Which Court tries Section 229(1)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS
Q17. What does Section 229(2) punish?
Answer:
Section 229(2) applies where a person intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in a case other than one covered by Section 229(1).
In other words, it deals with false evidence outside the judicial-proceeding category.
Q18. What is the punishment under Section 229(2)?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 3 YEARS
and shall also be liable to:
FINE UP TO ₹5,000
Q19. What is the classification of Section 229(2)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Bailable
- Any Magistrate
Q20. Is Section 229(2) cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q21. Is Section 229(2) bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
BAILABLE
Q22. Which Court tries Section 229(2)?
Answer:
ANY MAGISTRATE
Q23. What is the main difference between Section 229(1) and Section 229(2)?
Answer:
The main distinction is the context in which the false evidence is given or fabricated.
Section 229(1)
False evidence linked to a:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Punishment:
UP TO 7 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹10,000
Section 229(2)
False evidence in:
OTHER CASES
Punishment:
UP TO 3 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹5,000
Q24. Why is the punishment more severe under Section 229(1)?
Answer:
Because false evidence within a judicial proceeding directly threatens the administration of justice.
The law therefore treats it more seriously.
Q25. What is the easiest punishment memory?
Answer:
JUDICIAL = 7 YEARS + ₹10,000
OTHER = 3 YEARS + ₹5,000
Q26. What does Explanation 1 provide?
Answer:
Explanation 1 states:
A TRIAL BEFORE A COURT-MARTIAL IS A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Q27. Why is Explanation 1 important?
Answer:
It removes doubt about whether Court-martial proceedings fall within the expression “judicial proceeding.”
They expressly do.
Q28. What does Explanation 2 provide?
Answer:
Explanation 2 states that:
AN INVESTIGATION DIRECTED BY LAW PRELIMINARY TO A PROCEEDING BEFORE A COURT IS A STAGE OF A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
even though the investigation itself may not take place before a Court.
Q29. Must every stage of a judicial proceeding occur physically inside a Court?
Answer:
No.
Explanation 2 expressly shows that a legally directed preliminary investigation may be part of a judicial proceeding even though conducted elsewhere.
Q30. What is important about the words “directed by law”?
Answer:
The investigation must have a legal basis.
A purely private or informal enquiry does not become part of a judicial proceeding merely because litigation might later arise.
Q31. What does the Illustration to Explanation 2 say?
Answer:
A makes a false statement on oath before a Magistrate during an enquiry to determine whether Z should be committed for trial.
Because that enquiry is a stage of a judicial proceeding, A has given false evidence.
Q32. What does this Illustration teach?
Answer:
It teaches that a preliminary enquiry may already form part of a judicial proceeding.
The judicial proceeding therefore does not necessarily begin only at the formal trial.
Q33. Is a committal-related enquiry capable of being a judicial stage?
Answer:
Yes.
The Illustration expressly treats such an enquiry as a stage of a judicial proceeding.
Q34. What does Explanation 3 provide?
Answer:
Explanation 3 states that:
AN INVESTIGATION DIRECTED BY A COURT ACCORDING TO LAW AND CONDUCTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF A COURT IS A STAGE OF A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
even though the investigation may not take place before the Court itself.
Q35. How does Explanation 3 differ from Explanation 2?
Answer:
Explanation 2
Covers an investigation:
DIRECTED BY LAW
and preliminary to a Court proceeding.
Explanation 3
Covers an investigation:
DIRECTED BY A COURT ACCORDING TO LAW
and conducted under the Court’s authority.
Q36. What is the Illustration to Explanation 3?
Answer:
A gives a false statement on oath in an enquiry before an officer deputed by a Court to determine the boundaries of land on the spot.
Because the enquiry is conducted under Court authority, it is treated as a stage of a judicial proceeding.
Q37. Why is the boundary enquiry treated as part of a judicial proceeding?
Answer:
Because the officer is acting under the authority of a Court and carrying out an investigation directed according to law.
Q38. Does the officer conducting the investigation have to be a Judge?
Answer:
No.
The Illustration shows that an officer deputed by the Court may conduct the enquiry.
The key point is that the investigation is legally directed and conducted under Court authority.
Q39. Must the investigation take place in a courtroom?
Answer:
No.
Explanation 3 expressly states that it may take place elsewhere.
Q40. What is the common principle behind Explanations 2 and 3?
Answer:
The concept of a judicial proceeding extends beyond the physical courtroom.
Memory
JUDICIAL STAGE ≠ COURTROOM ONLY
Q41. What does “any stage of a judicial proceeding” indicate?
Answer:
It indicates breadth.
The false evidence need not be given only at the final trial.
It may occur at legally recognised preliminary or auxiliary stages as described in the Explanations.
Q42. Is a Court-martial included even though it is not an ordinary civil or criminal Court?
Answer:
Yes.
Explanation 1 expressly includes it.
Q43. What is the easiest way to remember the three Explanations?
Answer:
EXPLANATION 1 = COURT-MARTIAL
EXPLANATION 2 = INVESTIGATION DIRECTED BY LAW
EXPLANATION 3 = INVESTIGATION DIRECTED BY COURT
Q44. What is the significance of the phrase “Court of Justice” being changed?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, in Explanations 2 and 3:
“COURT OF JUSTICE”
has been replaced by:
“COURT”
This is a drafting change identified in the BNS.
Q45. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 229 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 229 BNS = Section 193 IPC
Q46. Has the substantive language changed?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the language remains unchanged except for:
- “Court of Justice” being replaced by “Court” in Explanations 2 and 3;
- The fixing of maximum fine amounts.
Q47. What fine changes were introduced?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 229(1)
Maximum fine:
₹10,000
Section 229(2)
Maximum fine:
₹5,000
Earlier, according to the comments, there was no upper limit for the fine under the corresponding provision.
Q48. Why is Section 229 important in the false-evidence scheme?
Answer:
Section 229 provides the general punishment framework for intentionally giving or fabricating false evidence.
Later provisions deal with aggravated situations, such as false evidence intended to procure conviction for very serious offences.
Q49. How does Section 229 relate to Section 230?
Answer:
Section 229
General punishment for false evidence.
Section 230
Aggravated false evidence aimed at:
CAPITAL CONVICTION
Q50. How does Section 229 relate to Section 231?
Answer:
Section 229
General false-evidence punishment.
Section 231
Aggravated false evidence aimed at conviction for:
NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE PUNISHABLE WITH LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
Q51. How does Section 229 differ from Section 232?
Answer:
Section 229
The accused:
GIVES OR FABRICATES FALSE EVIDENCE
Section 232
The accused:
THREATENS ANOTHER TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Q52. How does Section 229 differ from Section 233?
Answer:
Section 229
Focuses on:
GIVING OR FABRICATING
false evidence.
Section 233
Focuses on:
USING OR ATTEMPTING TO USE
false or fabricated evidence known to be false.
Memory
229 = GIVE/FABRICATE
233 = USE
Q53. Is actual wrongful conviction required under Section 229?
Answer:
No.
Section 229 is the general offence of intentionally giving or fabricating false evidence.
Wrongful conviction is not stated as a necessary ingredient.
Q54. Is actual damage to another person required?
Answer:
No.
The offence concerns the integrity of evidence itself.
Q55. Is financial gain required?
Answer:
No.
The section does not require financial gain.
Q56. Is malicious intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The provision specifically requires intentional false evidence.
Q57. Is dishonest intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The statutory requirement is intentional falsity.
Q58. What is the easiest problem-question test for Section 229(1)?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was false evidence given or fabricated?
- Was the conduct intentional?
- Was it connected with a judicial proceeding?
- If fabricated, was it meant to be used at some stage of such proceeding?
If yes, Section 229(1) becomes relevant.
Q59. What is the easiest test for Section 229(2)?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was false evidence intentionally given or fabricated?
- Does the case fall outside Section 229(1)?
If yes, Section 229(2) applies.
Q60. What are the core words to remember?
Answer:
FALSE EVIDENCE
INTENTION
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
OTHER CASE
7 / 3 YEARS
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Section 229(1)
Covers:
INTENTIONALLY GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE IN ANY STAGE OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
or
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE FOR USE IN ANY STAGE OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Punishment:
UP TO 7 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹10,000
2. Section 229(2)
Covers:
INTENTIONALLY GIVING OR FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE IN OTHER CASES
Punishment:
UP TO 3 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹5,000
3. Explanation 1
COURT-MARTIAL TRIAL = JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
4. Explanation 2
LEGAL PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION = STAGE OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
5. Explanation 3
COURT-DIRECTED INVESTIGATION = STAGE OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Essential Ingredients — Section 229(1)
FALSE EVIDENCE
+
INTENTIONAL GIVING
or
FABRICATION FOR USE
+
ANY STAGE OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
= SECTION 229(1)
Essential Ingredients — Section 229(2)
FALSE EVIDENCE
+
INTENTIONAL GIVING OR FABRICATION
+
CASE OUTSIDE SECTION 229(1)
= SECTION 229(2)
Punishment Ladder
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING → 7 YEARS + ₹10,000
OTHER CASE → 3 YEARS + ₹5,000
Memory
JUDICIAL = 7 / 10K
OTHER = 3 / 5K
Classification Notes
Section 229(1)
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS
Section 229(2)
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
ANY MAGISTRATE
IPC Equivalent and BNS Changes
According to the supplied comments:
Section 229 BNS = Section 193 IPC
BNS changes identified:
- “Court of Justice” → “Court” in Explanations 2 and 3;
- Fine under Section 229(1) capped at ₹10,000;
- Fine under Section 229(2) capped at ₹5,000.
Section 229 vs Section 230
Section 229
GENERAL FALSE EVIDENCE
Judicial proceeding:
UP TO 7 YEARS + ₹10,000
Other cases:
UP TO 3 YEARS + ₹5,000
Section 230
FALSE EVIDENCE AIMED AT CAPITAL CONVICTION
Punishment is far more severe.
Section 229 vs Section 231
Section 229
General offence.
Section 231
False evidence intended or known likely to procure conviction for:
LIFE / 7+ YEAR NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE
Section 229 vs Section 233
Section 229
GIVE / FABRICATE
Section 233
USE / ATTEMPT TO USE
Memory
229 = CREATE/GIVE
233 = USE
Quick Revision Notes
Section
229 BNS
Title
Punishment for false evidence
IPC Equivalent
Section 193 IPC
229(1)
False evidence in judicial proceeding.
Punishment
Up to 7 years + fine up to ₹10,000.
Classification
NC + Bailable + Magistrate First Class.
229(2)
False evidence in other cases.
Punishment
Up to 3 years + fine up to ₹5,000.
Classification
NC + Bailable + Any Magistrate.
Explanation 1
Court-martial = judicial proceeding.
Explanation 2
Investigation directed by law preliminary to Court proceeding = judicial stage.
Explanation 3
Court-directed lawful investigation = judicial stage.
BNS Changes
“Court of Justice” → “Court”; fine ceilings fixed at ₹10,000 and ₹5,000.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Treating all false evidence alike
Incorrect.
The punishment depends on whether the false evidence relates to:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
or
OTHER CASE
Trap 2 — Forgetting intention
The section requires intentional false evidence.
Trap 3 — Requiring all judicial stages to occur in Court
Incorrect.
Explanations 2 and 3 expressly extend the concept beyond the courtroom.
Trap 4 — Forgetting Court-martial
A Court-martial trial is expressly a judicial proceeding.
Trap 5 — Confusing Explanation 2 and Explanation 3
Remember:
EXPLANATION 2 = DIRECTED BY LAW
EXPLANATION 3 = DIRECTED BY COURT
Trap 6 — Thinking fabricated evidence must actually be used
The wording requires that it be fabricated:
FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING USED
Trap 7 — Forgetting the different fine ceilings
229(1) = ₹10,000
229(2) = ₹5,000
Trap 8 — Thinking Section 229(1) is non-bailable
Incorrect.
According to the supplied classification:
BAILABLE
Trap 9 — Confusing 229 with 230
229 = GENERAL FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = CAPITAL-CONVICTION FALSE EVIDENCE
Trap 10 — Confusing 229 with 233
229 = GIVE/FABRICATE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 229–248
229 = GENERAL FALSE EVIDENCE
230 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL CONVICTION
231 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR LIFE / 7+ CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION
241 = DESTROY EVIDENCE
242 = FALSE PERSONATION
243 = HIDE PROPERTY
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Best Memory Sequence
229 = GENERAL
230 = CAPITAL
231 = SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL
232 = THREAT
233 = USE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
241 = DESTROY
242 = PERSONATE
243 = REMOVE
244 = CLAIM PROPERTY
245 = SUFFER
246 = FALSE CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN
248 = ACCUSE
Ultimate Memory Formula
Section 229(1)
INTENTIONALLY GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
or
FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE FOR USE
+
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
= UP TO 7 YEARS + ₹10,000
Section 229(2)
INTENTIONALLY GIVE OR FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
+
OTHER CASE
= UP TO 3 YEARS + ₹5,000
Key Takeaway
Section 229 BNS provides the basic punishment framework for intentionally giving or fabricating false evidence.
The decisive distinction is:
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING OR OTHER CASE?
If the false evidence is connected with a judicial proceeding:
229(1) = UP TO 7 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹10,000
If it falls outside that category:
229(2) = UP TO 3 YEARS + FINE UP TO ₹5,000
The concept of a judicial proceeding is broad. It includes:
COURT-MARTIAL
LEGALLY DIRECTED PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
COURT-DIRECTED INVESTIGATION
even where those investigations take place outside the physical Court.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 229 BNS = Section 193 IPC
with the principal BNS changes being the substitution of “Court” for “Court of Justice” and the introduction of fixed maximum fines.
Final Memory Line
“229 = FALSE EVIDENCE: JUDICIAL PROCEEDING → 7 YEARS + ₹10K; OTHER CASE → 3 YEARS + ₹5K.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 231: Giving or Fabricating False Evidence with Intent to Procure Conviction of Offence Punishable with Imprisonment for Life or Imprisonment
Introduction
Section 231 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) deals with a particularly serious form of false evidence.
It applies where a person gives or fabricates false evidence intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will cause, another person to be convicted of a serious non-capital offence punishable with:
- Imprisonment for life, or
- Imprisonment for seven years or more.
The person giving or fabricating the false evidence is then punished as though he himself had been convicted of that serious offence.
The core idea is:
FALSE EVIDENCE + INTENT/KNOWLEDGE TO PROCURE SERIOUS CONVICTION = SAME LIABILITY AS THAT OFFENCE
Q1. What does Section 231 punish?
Answer:
Section 231 punishes a person who:
- Gives false evidence; or
- Fabricates false evidence;
- Intending thereby to cause another person to be convicted of a serious offence; or
- Knowing it to be likely that such conviction will result;
- The offence is non-capital, but punishable with:
- Imprisonment for life; or
- Imprisonment for seven years or more.
Q2. What is the object of Section 231?
Answer:
The object is to punish severely those who deliberately misuse false evidence to expose another person to conviction for a very serious offence.
The provision recognises that fabricating evidence to procure a serious conviction can itself have consequences comparable to committing the underlying offence.
Core Principle
FALSE EVIDENCE AIMED AT A SERIOUS WRONGFUL CONVICTION ATTRACTS THE PUNISHMENT OF THAT SERIOUS OFFENCE
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 231 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 231 BNS = Section 195 IPC
Q4. What change has been made under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the language remains unchanged, except that in the Illustration:
“COURT OF JUSTICE” → “COURT”
No other substantive change is identified in the supplied material.
Q5. What are the essential ingredients of Section 231?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- The accused gives or fabricates false evidence;
- He intends thereby to cause another person to be convicted; or
- He knows it is likely that such conviction will be caused;
- The intended conviction is for an offence under the law in force in India;
- The offence is not capital;
- The offence is punishable with:
- Imprisonment for life; or
- Imprisonment for a term of seven years or upwards.
Formula
GIVE/FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE + INTENT/KNOWLEDGE + SERIOUS NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE + LIFE OR 7+ YEARS = SECTION 231
Q6. What are the two prohibited acts?
Answer:
The section covers:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
and
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
Either is sufficient if the remaining ingredients are present.
Q7. Must both giving and fabricating occur?
Answer:
No.
The wording is alternative.
A person may be liable if he either:
- Gives false evidence; or
- Fabricates false evidence.
Q8. What is the required mental element?
Answer:
There are two alternative mental states:
- Intent to cause the conviction; or
- Knowledge that it is likely that the false evidence will cause the conviction.
Memory
INTENDS
or
KNOWS LIKELY
Q9. Is specific intent always necessary?
Answer:
No.
Specific intent is one route to liability.
The section also applies where the person knows that the false evidence is likely to cause the serious conviction.
Q10. Is mere negligence enough?
Answer:
No.
The provision requires either:
- Intention; or
- Knowledge of likelihood.
Negligence alone is insufficient.
Q11. Is mere carelessness in giving evidence enough?
Answer:
No.
Section 231 concerns deliberate or knowingly dangerous misuse of false evidence aimed at a serious conviction.
Q12. Must the person actually be convicted?
Answer:
The supplied text focuses on the accused’s intention or knowledge as to causing a conviction.
It does not expressly say that the targeted person must actually be convicted before Section 231 can apply.
The central element is the intended or likely consequence.
Q13. Why is that important?
Answer:
Because the offence is tied to the purpose and likely effect of the false evidence, not merely the ultimate success of the scheme.
A failed attempt to secure conviction may still fall within the provision if the statutory ingredients are proved.
Q14. What kind of underlying offence is required?
Answer:
The targeted offence must be:
- An offence under the law in force in India;
- Not capital; and
- Punishable with:
- Imprisonment for life; or
- Imprisonment for seven years or upwards.
Q15. What does “not capital” mean here?
Answer:
It means the offence is not one punishable with death.
Section 231 therefore applies to serious offences below the capital category.
Q16. Why does the section expressly say “not capital”?
Answer:
Because the provision distinguishes this category from offences for which the law provides capital punishment.
For Section 231, the relevant serious offences are non-capital offences punishable with life imprisonment or seven years and above.
Q17. Is an offence punishable with exactly seven years included?
Answer:
Yes.
The wording is:
“SEVEN YEARS OR UPWARDS”
Therefore:
7 YEARS = INCLUDED
Q18. Is an offence punishable with six years included?
Answer:
No.
An offence punishable only up to six years would not satisfy the seven-years-or-upwards requirement.
Q19. Is an offence punishable with ten years included?
Answer:
Yes.
Ten years clearly falls within:
SEVEN YEARS OR UPWARDS
Q20. Is an offence punishable with life imprisonment included?
Answer:
Yes.
Life imprisonment is expressly mentioned.
Q21. What if the offence is punishable with death?
Answer:
Section 231 expressly deals with offences which are:
NOT CAPITAL
Therefore, a capital offence falls outside this particular section.
Q22. What is the punishment under Section 231?
Answer:
The offender:
SHALL BE PUNISHED AS A PERSON CONVICTED OF THAT OFFENCE WOULD BE LIABLE TO BE PUNISHED
This means the punishment follows the punishment attached to the serious offence whose conviction the false evidence was intended or likely to procure.
Q23. Does Section 231 prescribe one fixed punishment?
Answer:
No.
The punishment depends on the underlying offence.
Q24. Why is the punishment structure unusual?
Answer:
Because the section does not simply impose a fixed maximum term.
Instead, it adopts the punishment exposure of the serious offence that the accused sought to fasten upon another person.
Q25. What is the underlying idea behind this punishment rule?
Answer:
If a person deliberately tries to make another suffer conviction for a serious offence by using false evidence, the law makes the false-evidence offender answerable to the same scale of punishment.
Q26. What does the Illustration say?
Answer:
The Illustration states that:
- A gives false evidence before a Court;
- A intends thereby to cause Z to be convicted of dacoity;
- Dacoity is punishable with imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment up to ten years, with or without fine;
- Therefore A is liable to imprisonment for life or imprisonment, with or without fine.
Q27. Why is dacoity used in the Illustration?
Answer:
Because dacoity is a serious non-capital offence carrying punishment within the category contemplated by Section 231.
It therefore clearly demonstrates how the punishment rule operates.
Q28. What does the Illustration teach about punishment?
Answer:
It shows that the false-evidence offender may face the same range of punishment applicable to the serious offence whose conviction he intended to procure.
Q29. Does the Illustration require the targeted person to be actually convicted?
Answer:
The Illustration focuses on A’s intention to cause Z to be convicted and then states A’s liability.
This reinforces the importance of the accused’s intention in the provision.
Q30. What is the significance of the words “by the law for the time being in force in India”?
Answer:
The seriousness of the underlying offence is assessed according to the law currently in force in India.
Thus, the punishment classification of that offence determines whether Section 231 applies.
Q31. Must the false evidence relate directly to the serious offence?
Answer:
Yes, in the sense that it must be given or fabricated with the intention, or knowledge of likelihood, that it will cause the person to be convicted of that offence.
Q32. Is actual injury to the targeted person required?
Answer:
No separate requirement of actual injury is stated.
The offence centres on the false evidence and the intended or likely serious conviction.
Q33. Is financial motive required?
Answer:
No.
No financial gain is required.
Q34. Is malicious intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The provision requires:
- Intent to cause conviction; or
- Knowledge of likelihood.
That is sufficient.
Q35. Is dishonest intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The section does not use the word “dishonestly.”
Q36. Is fraudulent intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The section instead focuses specifically on false evidence and the intended or likely conviction.
Q37. Must the false evidence be given in Court?
Answer:
The Illustration refers to false evidence before a Court, but the statutory text itself uses the broader expression:
“GIVES OR FABRICATES FALSE EVIDENCE”
For study purposes, the statutory requirements of false evidence and the intended conviction remain central.
Q38. What is the classification of Section 231?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Non-Bailable
- Triable by the Court of Session
Q39. Is Section 231 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q40. Is Section 231 bailable?
Answer:
No.
NON-BAILABLE
Q41. Which Court tries the offence?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
COURT OF SESSION
Q42. Why is Section 231 non-bailable despite being non-cognizable?
Answer:
The supplied classification treats it as non-bailable because of the seriousness of the conduct and the severe punishment exposure linked to the underlying offence.
For examination purposes, remember the classification exactly:
NC + NB + SESSION
Q43. What is the easiest classification memory?
Answer:
231 = NON-COGNIZABLE + NON-BAILABLE + COURT OF SESSION
Q44. How does Section 231 differ from Section 232?
Answer:
Section 231
The accused:
GIVES OR FABRICATES FALSE EVIDENCE
with intent or knowledge relating to a serious conviction.
Section 232
The accused:
THREATENS ANOTHER PERSON
with intent to make that person give false evidence.
Memory
231 = CREATE/GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE FOR SERIOUS CONVICTION
232 = THREAT SOMEONE TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Q45. How does Section 231 differ from Section 233?
Answer:
Section 231
Focuses on:
GIVING OR FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
with intent/knowledge to procure conviction of a serious offence.
Section 233
Focuses on:
CORRUPTLY USING OR ATTEMPTING TO USE FALSE/FABRICATED EVIDENCE
known to be false or fabricated.
Memory
231 = GIVE/FABRICATE FOR CONVICTION
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
Q46. Is Section 231 a general false-evidence provision?
Answer:
It is a specially aggravated provision because it links false evidence with the intended conviction for a serious offence.
Q47. Why is the seven-year threshold important?
Answer:
Because it separates the aggravated category under Section 231 from less serious offences.
The underlying offence must be punishable with:
LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
Q48. What if an offence carries a maximum of seven years?
Answer:
It is included.
The words are:
SEVEN YEARS OR UPWARDS
Q49. What if the offence carries a maximum of three years?
Answer:
Section 231 would not apply on that basis because the punishment threshold is not met.
Q50. What if the offence is punishable with life imprisonment alternatively with ten years?
Answer:
It falls within Section 231.
The Illustration involving dacoity demonstrates precisely this type of punishment structure.
Q51. What if the accused intends merely to embarrass another person but not procure conviction?
Answer:
Section 231 would not be attracted merely on that intention.
The false evidence must be connected to an intention or known likelihood of causing conviction for the specified serious offence.
Q52. What if the accused knows conviction is likely but says he did not specifically desire it?
Answer:
The section may still apply because it expressly covers:
KNOWING IT TO BE LIKELY
that the false evidence will cause the conviction.
Q53. Why are intent and knowledge written separately?
Answer:
Because the law covers both:
- A person who positively aims at the conviction; and
- A person who knows that his false evidence is likely to produce that consequence.
Q54. What is the easiest problem-question test?
Answer:
Ask:
- Did the accused give or fabricate false evidence?
- Did he intend to cause conviction, or know conviction was likely?
- Was the targeted offence non-capital?
- Was it punishable with life imprisonment or seven years or more?
- If yes, Section 231 becomes relevant.
Q55. What are the key words to remember?
Answer:
FALSE EVIDENCE
GIVE / FABRICATE
INTEND / KNOW LIKELY
CONVICTION
NON-CAPITAL
LIFE / 7+ YEARS
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Prohibited Conduct
The section covers:
GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
or
FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE
2. Mental Element
The accused must:
INTEND TO CAUSE CONVICTION
or
KNOW IT IS LIKELY TO CAUSE CONVICTION
3. Serious Offence Threshold
The targeted offence must be:
NON-CAPITAL
and punishable with:
LIFE IMPRISONMENT
or
7 YEARS OR UPWARDS
4. Punishment
The offender is punishable:
AS A PERSON CONVICTED OF THAT OFFENCE WOULD BE LIABLE TO BE PUNISHED
5. Illustration
False evidence intended to procure conviction for dacoity attracts the punishment liability applicable to dacoity.
Essential Ingredients — Rapid Recall
GIVE / FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
+
INTENT TO CAUSE OR KNOWLEDGE OF LIKELY CONVICTION
+
NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE
+
LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
= SECTION 231
Punishment Formula
PUNISHMENT OF FALSE-EVIDENCE OFFENDER
=
PUNISHMENT LIABILITY OF PERSON CONVICTED OF TARGET OFFENCE
Classification Notes
According to the supplied material:
NON-COGNIZABLE
NON-BAILABLE
COURT OF SESSION
Memory
231 = NC + NB + SESSION
IPC Equivalent and BNS Change
According to the supplied comments:
Section 231 BNS = Section 195 IPC
The substantive language remains unchanged.
The stated drafting change in the Illustration is:
“COURT OF JUSTICE” → “COURT”
Section 231 vs Section 232
Section 231
GIVE/FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE TO PROCURE SERIOUS CONVICTION
Punishment follows the serious offence.
Section 232
THREAT PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Basic punishment up to seven years, with further consequence where an innocent person suffers a grave sentence.
Section 231 vs Section 233
Section 231
GIVE OR FABRICATE
with serious-conviction intent/knowledge.
Section 233
USE OR ATTEMPT TO USE
false or fabricated evidence known to be false.
Quick Revision Notes
Section
231 BNS
Title
Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of offence punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment
IPC Equivalent
Section 195 IPC
Act
Give or fabricate false evidence.
Mens Rea
Intent to cause conviction or knowledge that conviction is likely.
Target Offence
Non-capital offence.
Punishment Threshold
Life imprisonment or seven years or upwards.
Punishment
Same punishment liability as a person convicted of the targeted offence.
Illustration
False evidence aimed at procuring conviction for dacoity.
Classification
Non-Cognizable + Non-Bailable + Court of Session
BNS Change
“Court of Justice” in the Illustration replaced with “Court.”
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Forgetting that the offence must be non-capital
Section 231 expressly says:
NOT CAPITAL
Trap 2 — Thinking the threshold is “more than seven years”
Incorrect.
The wording is:
SEVEN YEARS OR UPWARDS
Therefore exactly seven years is included.
Trap 3 — Requiring only intention
Knowledge that conviction is likely is also sufficient.
Trap 4 — Treating negligence as sufficient
Incorrect.
Section 231 requires intent or knowledge of likelihood.
Trap 5 — Thinking actual conviction is always expressly required
The statutory wording focuses on intent or knowledge of likelihood to cause conviction.
Trap 6 — Inventing a fixed seven-year punishment for Section 231
Incorrect.
Punishment follows the targeted serious offence.
Trap 7 — Confusing Section 231 with Section 232
Remember:
231 = GIVE/FABRICATE
232 = THREAT
Trap 8 — Confusing Section 231 with Section 233
Remember:
231 = CREATE/GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE FOR SERIOUS CONVICTION
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
Trap 9 — Thinking Section 231 is bailable
Incorrect.
According to the supplied classification:
NON-BAILABLE
Trap 10 — Forgetting Court of Session
The supplied classification states:
COURT OF SESSION
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 231–248
231 = FALSE EVIDENCE FOR SERIOUS CONVICTION
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION
241 = DESTROY EVIDENCE
242 = FALSE PERSONATION
243 = HIDE PROPERTY
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Best Memory Sequence
231 = CONVICT
232 = THREAT
233 = USE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
241 = DESTROY
242 = PERSONATE
243 = REMOVE
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER
246 = FALSE CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN
248 = ACCUSE
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 231
GIVE OR FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE
+
INTEND TO CAUSE / KNOW LIKELY TO CAUSE CONVICTION
+
NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE
+
LIFE IMPRISONMENT OR 7 YEARS AND ABOVE
= PUNISHMENT AS IF CONVICTED OF THAT OFFENCE
Key Takeaway
Section 231 BNS deals with aggravated false evidence aimed at procuring conviction for a serious non-capital offence.
The essential structure is:
FALSE EVIDENCE
+ GIVE OR FABRICATE
+ INTENT OR KNOWLEDGE OF LIKELY CONVICTION
+ NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE
+ LIFE OR 7+ YEARS
The punishment is not a separately fixed term. Instead:
THE FALSE-EVIDENCE OFFENDER IS PUNISHED AS A PERSON CONVICTED OF THE TARGETED OFFENCE WOULD BE LIABLE TO BE PUNISHED
According to the supplied classification, the offence is:
Non-Cognizable + Non-Bailable + Court of Session
According to the supplied comments:
Section 231 BNS = Section 195 IPC
with the Illustration updated from “Court of Justice” to “Court.”
Final Memory Line
“231 = GIVE OR FABRICATE FALSE EVIDENCE TO PROCURE CONVICTION FOR A NON-CAPITAL OFFENCE PUNISHABLE WITH LIFE OR 7+ YEARS → FACE THAT OFFENCE’S PUNISHMENT.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 232: Threatening Any Person to Give False Evidence
Introduction
Section 232 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes a person who threatens another with injury in order to compel that person to give false evidence.
The provision targets pressure, intimidation, or coercion directed at a person with the specific intention of causing false evidence to be given.
It also creates a much more serious consequence where the threatened false evidence leads to the conviction and severe sentencing of an innocent person.
The core structure is:
THREAT OF INJURY + INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE = SECTION 232(1)
and, where the false evidence causes an innocent person to receive a very serious sentence:
FALSE EVIDENCE + INNOCENT PERSON CONVICTED + DEATH / MORE THAN 7 YEARS = SAME PUNISHMENT FOR THREATENER UNDER SECTION 232(2)
Q1. What does Section 232 punish?
Answer:
Section 232 punishes a person who threatens another with injury to:
- His person;
- His reputation;
- His property;
- The person of someone in whom he is interested; or
- The reputation of someone in whom he is interested,
with the intention of causing that person to give false evidence.
Q2. What is the object of Section 232?
Answer:
The object is to protect the integrity of evidence by preventing witnesses or other persons from being coerced into giving false evidence.
The provision aims to ensure that evidence is not manufactured through fear.
Core Principle
NO PERSON MAY USE THREATS TO FORCE ANOTHER TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 232 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 232 BNS = Section 195A IPC
Q4. Has Section 232 changed under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The language remains unchanged; but
- The provision has been rearranged into sub-sections.
Thus, the supplied material indicates a structural rather than substantive change.
Q5. How many sub-sections does Section 232 contain?
Answer:
There are two sub-sections:
- Section 232(1) — threatening a person with injury with intent to cause false evidence;
- Section 232(2) — enhanced consequence where an innocent person is convicted and severely sentenced because of such false evidence.
Q6. What are the essential ingredients of Section 232(1)?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- The accused threatens another person;
- The threat concerns a legally recognised kind of injury;
- The threat is made with intent;
- The specific intent is to cause the threatened person to give false evidence.
Formula
THREAT + SPECIFIED INJURY + INTENT + FALSE EVIDENCE = SECTION 232(1)
Q7. What forms of injury are covered?
Answer:
The threat may relate to injury to:
- The threatened person’s person;
- His reputation;
- His property;
- The person of someone in whom he is interested;
- The reputation of someone in whom he is interested.
Q8. Is injury to property of an interested person expressly included?
Answer:
No.
The wording supplied specifically includes:
- Person or reputation of someone in whom the threatened person is interested.
For the threatened person himself, the section includes:
- Person;
- Reputation;
- Property.
This distinction should be remembered carefully.
Q9. What is meant by threat to the person?
Answer:
It refers to a threat of bodily or physical injury to the person threatened, or to the person of someone in whom he is interested.
Q10. What is meant by threat to reputation?
Answer:
It refers to a threat of harm to reputation.
This may relate to:
- The threatened person’s reputation; or
- The reputation of another person in whom he is interested.
Q11. What is meant by threat to property?
Answer:
The section expressly covers a threat of injury to the property of the person being threatened.
Q12. Must the threat be directed only at the person who is supposed to give false evidence?
Answer:
The threat is made to that person, but the threatened injury may concern either:
- That person himself; or
- Another person in whom he is interested.
Thus, pressure may be applied indirectly through threats against a person close to him.
Q13. Must the threat actually be carried out?
Answer:
No.
Section 232(1) focuses on the making of the threat with the required intent.
The threatened injury need not actually occur.
Q14. Must the person actually give false evidence under Section 232(1)?
Answer:
The text of Section 232(1) focuses on:
INTENT TO CAUSE THAT PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
Therefore, the making of the threat with that intent is central.
Actual successful giving of false evidence is not expressly stated as necessary for liability under sub-section (1).
Q15. Why is specific intent important?
Answer:
Because not every threat falls under Section 232.
The threat must be made:
WITH INTENT TO CAUSE THAT PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
A threat for some unrelated purpose would not fall within this section merely because it is a threat.
Q16. Is general intimidation enough?
Answer:
No.
The prosecution must connect the threat with the specific purpose of causing false evidence to be given.
Q17. Is knowledge alone enough?
Answer:
No.
Section 232(1) expressly requires:
INTENT
to cause false evidence.
Q18. Is negligence relevant?
Answer:
No.
This is not a negligence-based offence.
The mental element is intentional.
Q19. Is dishonest intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The required intent is narrower and more specific:
INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
Q20. Is fraudulent intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The statutory focus is the threat and its intended evidentiary consequence.
Q21. Is malicious intention expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The section does not separately require malice.
Q22. Give a simple example of Section 232(1).
Answer:
A tells B:
“If you do not falsely testify that C was present at the scene, I will injure you.”
If A makes this threat intending to cause B to give false evidence, Section 232(1) may apply.
Q23. Give an example involving reputation.
Answer:
A threatens to publicly damage B’s reputation unless B gives false evidence in a proceeding.
If the threat is made with the required intent, Section 232(1) may apply.
Q24. Give an example involving another person.
Answer:
A tells B:
“If you do not give false evidence against C, I will injure your brother.”
If B is interested in his brother and A intends thereby to cause B to give false evidence, the provision may apply.
Q25. Give an example involving property.
Answer:
A threatens to destroy B’s property unless B gives false evidence.
That threat may fall within Section 232(1).
Q26. What is the punishment under Section 232(1)?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 7 YEARS
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Q27. Is there a minimum sentence under Section 232(1)?
Answer:
No minimum sentence is stated in the supplied provision.
The imprisonment may extend up to seven years.
Q28. What does “either description” mean here?
Answer:
It means the imprisonment may be of either legally recognised description permitted by the provision.
For examination purposes, the key point is:
UP TO 7 YEARS
Q29. What is the classification of Section 232(1)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Cognizable
- Non-Bailable
- Triable by the Court by which the offence of giving false evidence is triable
Q30. Is Section 232(1) cognizable?
Answer:
Yes.
COGNIZABLE
Q31. Is Section 232(1) bailable?
Answer:
No.
NON-BAILABLE
Q32. Which Court tries Section 232(1)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
THE COURT BY WHICH THE OFFENCE OF GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE IS TRIABLE
Q33. What does Section 232(2) deal with?
Answer:
Section 232(2) deals with a much more serious consequence.
It applies where:
- False evidence of the kind contemplated in sub-section (1) is given;
- An innocent person is convicted because of that false evidence;
- The innocent person is sentenced either:
- To death; or
- To imprisonment for more than seven years.
Q34. What additional result is required under Section 232(2)?
Answer:
There must be:
CONVICTION OF AN INNOCENT PERSON
and
A SPECIFIED SERIOUS SENTENCE
in consequence of the false evidence.
Q35. Must the innocent person merely be prosecuted?
Answer:
No.
Sub-section (2) requires that the innocent person be:
CONVICTED AND SENTENCED
Q36. What sentences trigger Section 232(2)?
Answer:
The innocent person must be sentenced to:
- Death; or
- Imprisonment for more than seven years.
Q37. Is exactly seven years enough for Section 232(2)?
Answer:
On the wording supplied:
NO
The provision says:
“MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS”
Therefore, exactly seven years does not fall within that limb.
Q38. What if the innocent person is sentenced to eight years?
Answer:
That satisfies the “more than seven years” requirement, assuming all other ingredients are established.
Q39. What if the innocent person is sentenced to five years?
Answer:
Section 232(2), as supplied, would not apply because the sentence is not:
- Death; or
- More than seven years.
Sub-section (1) may still remain relevant to the threatening conduct.
Q40. Must the conviction be caused by the false evidence?
Answer:
Yes.
The provision uses the words:
“IN CONSEQUENCE OF FALSE EVIDENCE”
There must therefore be the required causal connection.
Q41. What is the punishment under Section 232(2)?
Answer:
The person who threatened is to be punished:
WITH THE SAME PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCE
IN THE SAME MANNER
AND TO THE SAME EXTENT
as the innocent person was punished and sentenced.
Q42. Why is Section 232(2) especially severe?
Answer:
Because the punishment mirrors the grave consequence suffered by the innocent person.
If false evidence procured through threats causes an innocent person to receive an extremely severe sentence, the person responsible for the threat faces a corresponding punishment.
Q43. What happens if the innocent person is sentenced to death?
Answer:
According to the supplied wording, the person who made the threat is punishable with:
THE SAME PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCE
to the same extent.
Q44. What happens if the innocent person is sentenced to more than seven years’ imprisonment?
Answer:
The threatener is punishable with the same punishment and sentence, in the same manner and to the same extent, as the innocent person.
Q45. Does Section 232(2) create a fixed maximum of seven years?
Answer:
No.
The seven-year maximum belongs to Section 232(1).
Under Section 232(2), the punishment tracks the sentence imposed on the innocent person where the statutory conditions are met.
Q46. What is the classification of Section 232(2)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Cognizable
- Non-Bailable
- Triable by the Court by which the offence of giving false evidence is triable
Q47. Is Section 232(2) cognizable?
Answer:
Yes.
COGNIZABLE
Q48. Is Section 232(2) bailable?
Answer:
No.
NON-BAILABLE
Q49. What is the main difference between Sections 232(1) and 232(2)?
Answer:
Section 232(1)
Focuses on:
THE THREAT ITSELF
with intent to cause false evidence.
Punishment:
UP TO 7 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Section 232(2)
Focuses on:
THE GRAVE CONSEQUENCE OF THE FALSE EVIDENCE
where an innocent person is convicted and sentenced to death or more than seven years.
Punishment:
SAME AS THE INNOCENT PERSON’S SENTENCE
Q50. What is the easiest memory formula for the two sub-sections?
Answer:
232(1) = THREAT TO CREATE FALSE EVIDENCE
232(2) = FALSE EVIDENCE CAUSES GRAVE WRONGFUL CONVICTION
Q51. Must the person threatened be an accused person?
Answer:
No such limitation appears in the supplied wording.
The section refers generally to:
“ANOTHER”
and seeks to prevent that person from being compelled to give false evidence.
Q52. Must the threatened person be a witness already?
Answer:
The supplied wording does not expressly require that the person must already have entered the witness box or formally become a witness.
The central requirement is the intention to cause that person to give false evidence.
Q53. Must judicial proceedings already have begun?
Answer:
The supplied text does not expressly impose such a requirement.
The key question is whether the threat is made with intent to cause false evidence to be given.
Q54. Is actual false evidence required for Section 232(1)?
Answer:
No express requirement of completed false evidence appears in sub-section (1).
The offence focuses on:
THREAT + INTENT
Q55. Is actual false evidence required for Section 232(2)?
Answer:
Yes.
Sub-section (2) expressly refers to the false evidence mentioned in sub-section (1), and the innocent person’s conviction and sentence must occur in consequence of it.
Q56. Can Section 232(2) apply if the threatened person refuses to give false evidence?
Answer:
No, because the required consequential false evidence and wrongful conviction would be absent.
However, the threat may still fall under Section 232(1).
Q57. Can Section 232(1) apply even if the plan fails completely?
Answer:
Yes, provided the threat was made with the required intent.
The threatened person need not actually comply.
Q58. Is proof of actual fear expressly required?
Answer:
The supplied wording focuses on the accused making a threat with the specified intent.
It does not separately state that the person threatened must actually become frightened.
Q59. Must the threat succeed in influencing the person?
Answer:
Not for sub-section (1).
The section focuses on the threat and the intention behind it.
Q60. What is the easiest examination checklist for Section 232(1)?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was there a threat?
- Was the threatened injury to:
- Person;
- Reputation;
- Property; or
- Person/reputation of someone in whom the victim was interested?
- Was the threat made intentionally?
- Was the purpose to cause false evidence?
If yes, Section 232(1) becomes relevant.
Q61. What is the examination checklist for Section 232(2)?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was false evidence given as contemplated by Section 232(1)?
- Was an innocent person convicted because of that false evidence?
- Was that person sentenced to:
- Death; or
- More than seven years’ imprisonment?
- If yes, the threatener faces the same punishment and sentence.
Q62. What are the key words to remember?
Answer:
THREAT
INJURY
INTENT
FALSE EVIDENCE
INNOCENT CONVICTION
MIRRORED PUNISHMENT
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Act
The prohibited conduct is:
THREATENING ANOTHER PERSON
2. Threatened Injury
The threat may concern:
PERSON
REPUTATION
PROPERTY
or, in relation to another person in whom the victim is interested:
PERSON OR REPUTATION
3. Specific Intent
The accused must act:
WITH INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
This is the central mens rea.
4. Actual Compliance Not Necessary for Section 232(1)
The threatened person need not actually give false evidence for the basic threatening offence to arise.
5. Consequential Liability Under Section 232(2)
If the false evidence leads to:
AN INNOCENT PERSON’S CONVICTION
and sentence of:
DEATH
or
MORE THAN 7 YEARS
the threatener faces corresponding punishment.
Essential Ingredients — Section 232(1)
THREAT TO ANOTHER
+
INJURY TO PERSON / REPUTATION / PROPERTY OR PERSON/REPUTATION OF INTERESTED PERSON
+
INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
= SECTION 232(1)
Essential Ingredients — Section 232(2)
FALSE EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE THREAT
+
INNOCENT PERSON CONVICTED
+
CONVICTION CAUSED BY THAT FALSE EVIDENCE
+
DEATH OR MORE THAN 7 YEARS’ IMPRISONMENT
= SECTION 232(2)
Punishment Notes
Section 232(1)
UP TO 7 YEARS
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Section 232(2)
SAME PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCE AS THE INNOCENT PERSON
in the same manner and to the same extent.
Classification Notes
For both sub-sections, according to the supplied classification:
COGNIZABLE
NON-BAILABLE
COURT WHICH TRIES THE OFFENCE OF GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE
IPC Equivalent and BNS Position
According to the supplied comments:
Section 232 BNS = Section 195A IPC
The language remains unchanged, but the provision has been rearranged into sub-sections.
Section 232 vs Section 233
Section 232
THREATEN PERSON TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
The wrongdoing occurs at the stage of coercing someone to create false evidence.
Section 233
USE FALSE OR FABRICATED EVIDENCE
The wrongdoing occurs at the stage of corruptly using or attempting to use evidence already known to be false or fabricated.
Memory
232 = THREAT
233 = USE
Section 232 vs Sections 234–237
The sequence becomes especially easy to remember:
232 = THREAT PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
This creates a clear false-evidence progression.
Quick Revision Notes
Section
232 BNS
Title
Threatening any person to give false evidence
IPC Equivalent
Section 195A IPC
Section 232(1) Act
Threaten another with specified injury.
Mens Rea
Intent to cause that person to give false evidence.
Threatened Interests
Person / reputation / property of threatened person; person / reputation of someone in whom he is interested.
232(1) Punishment
Up to 7 years / fine / both.
232(2) Trigger
Innocent person convicted due to false evidence and sentenced to death or imprisonment for more than 7 years.
232(2) Punishment
Same punishment and sentence as innocent person.
Classification
Cognizable + Non-Bailable + Court competent to try giving false evidence
BNS Change
Rearranged into sub-sections; no substantive language change stated.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Treating every threat as Section 232
Incorrect.
The threat must be made:
WITH INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
Trap 2 — Forgetting reputation and property
The threat is not limited to bodily injury.
It can concern:
PERSON + REPUTATION + PROPERTY
Trap 3 — Forgetting threats against an interested person
The threat can concern the:
PERSON OR REPUTATION
of someone in whom the threatened person is interested.
Trap 4 — Adding property of the interested third person
Be careful.
The supplied wording mentions:
PERSON OR REPUTATION
of that interested person, not property.
Trap 5 — Requiring the false evidence actually to be given under Section 232(1)
Incorrect.
The basic offence focuses on threat plus intent.
Trap 6 — Requiring the threat actually to be carried out
Incorrect.
The injury need not occur.
Trap 7 — Forgetting causation under Section 232(2)
The innocent person’s conviction must occur:
IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE FALSE EVIDENCE
Trap 8 — Treating exactly seven years as enough for Section 232(2)
Incorrect.
The text says:
MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS
Trap 9 — Applying Section 232(2) merely because someone was acquitted after a false allegation
Incorrect.
The provision requires:
INNOCENT PERSON CONVICTED AND SENTENCED
with the specified serious punishment.
Trap 10 — Confusing ordinary punishment with consequential punishment
Remember:
232(1) = UP TO 7 YEARS
232(2) = SAME SENTENCE AS INNOCENT PERSON
Trap 11 — Thinking the offence is bailable
Incorrect.
According to the supplied classification:
NON-BAILABLE
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 232–248
232 = THREAT FOR FALSE EVIDENCE
233 = USE FALSE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE FALSE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE FALSE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE FALSE DECLARATION
237 = USE FALSE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN OFFENDER
239 = OMIT INFORMATION
240 = GIVE FALSE INFORMATION
241 = DESTROY EVIDENCE
242 = FALSE PERSONATION
243 = HIDE PROPERTY
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Best Memory Sequence
232 = THREAT
233 = USE EVIDENCE
234 = ISSUE CERTIFICATE
235 = USE CERTIFICATE
236 = MAKE DECLARATION
237 = USE DECLARATION
238 = SCREEN
239 = SILENCE
240 = LIE
241 = DESTROY
242 = PERSONATE
243 = REMOVE
244 = FALSE PROPERTY CLAIM
245 = SUFFER
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN
248 = ACCUSE
Ultimate Memory Formula
Section 232(1)
THREAT
+
INJURY TO PERSON / REPUTATION / PROPERTY
+
INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
= UP TO 7 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Section 232(2)
FALSE EVIDENCE
+
INNOCENT PERSON CONVICTED
+
DEATH OR MORE THAN 7 YEARS
= SAME PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCE FOR THREATENER
Key Takeaway
Section 232 BNS protects the truthfulness of evidence by criminalising threats used to compel another person to give false evidence.
The basic offence under Section 232(1) is:
THREAT + SPECIFIED INJURY + INTENT TO CAUSE FALSE EVIDENCE
and is punishable with:
UP TO 7 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Section 232(2) becomes relevant where the false evidence causes an innocent person to be convicted and sentenced to:
DEATH
or
MORE THAN 7 YEARS’ IMPRISONMENT
In that case, the threatener receives:
THE SAME PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCE
According to the supplied comments:
Section 232 BNS = Section 195A IPC
and the provision has been rearranged into sub-sections without a stated substantive change.
Final Memory Line
“232 = THREAT A PERSON TO GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE; IF AN INNOCENT PERSON SUFFERS A GRAVE SENTENCE BECAUSE OF IT, THE THREATENER SUFFERS THE SAME.”