- Published on
Islamic Law of Transaction: What Can You Do If You Own the Property, the Usufruct, or Both?
The easiest way to understand this is to separate the asset itself from the benefit produced by the asset.
1. If You Own the Property Only
This means you own the physical asset, but somebody else currently owns its usufruct.
Example: Ali owns a house, but Ahmad has the legal right to live in it for 10 years.
So:
Ali → owns the house
Ahmad → owns the 10-year usufruct
Ali is still the owner of the house, but his powers are limited because Ahmad’s usufruct must be respected.
Ali cannot normally use the house himself in a way that interferes with Ahmad’s right. He also cannot give the same usufruct to another person while Ahmad already owns it.
Example
Ahmad has the legal right to live in Ali’s house for 10 years.
Ali cannot say:
“It is my house, so I am moving in tomorrow.”
Why?
Because although Ali owns the property, Ahmad currently owns the benefit of living in it.
So:
Property ownership alone = ownership of the asset, but not necessarily the present right to use it.
2. What Can the Property Owner Do?
The property owner remains the owner of the physical asset.
However, whatever he does must respect the existing usufruct.
For example, he cannot:
destroy the property → because that would destroy the usufruct
take over the use himself → because the current benefit belongs to another
lease the same benefit to someone else → because he does not presently own that benefit
The important rule is:
Owning the property does not allow you to interfere with a usufruct that legally belongs to another person.
Example
Ali owns farmland.
Yusuf has the right to cultivate it for five years.
Ali cannot use the land himself for farming during those five years if doing so prevents Yusuf from exercising his usufruct.
3. If You Own the Usufruct Only
This means:
You do not own the physical asset, but you own the legal right to use and benefit from it.
Example
Ali owns an apartment.
Ahmad leases it for two years.
So:
Ali → owns apartment
Ahmad → owns the residential usufruct for two years
Ahmad may use the apartment according to the terms of his usufruct.
He may:
- live in it,
- use its rooms,
- enjoy the agreed facilities,
- exercise other uses allowed by the contract and Islamic Law.
But Ahmad does not own the physical apartment.
Therefore, he cannot sell the apartment itself.
4. What Can a Usufruct Owner Do?
A usufruct owner can generally enjoy the specific benefit that was legally given to him.
The exact powers depend on:
- how the usufruct was created,
- the agreement,
- its purpose,
- its duration,
- the applicable rules of Islamic Law.
Example
Suppose Ahmad rents a shop for three years.
His usufruct may allow him to:
occupy the shop
↓
operate the agreed lawful business
↓
benefit from the space
But it does not allow him to say:
“I own the building, so I will sell it.”
He cannot sell the physical property because he does not own it.
5. Can the Usufruct Holder Transfer the Usufruct?
Sometimes yes, but not automatically.
It depends on the contract and applicable Islamic legal rules.
For example, a tenant may sometimes be allowed to sublease or permit others to use the property, provided:
- the original agreement permits it,
- the new use does not harm the property,
- the use does not exceed the original usufruct.
But if the usufruct was personal, such as:
“Ahmad alone may live in this house for life,”
Ahmad may not necessarily be able to transfer that personal right to Yusuf.
So:
Owning usufruct gives rights over the benefit, but only within the limits of that usufruct.
6. If You Own Both the Property and the Usufruct
This is called:
Total Ownership — al-Milk al-Tāmm
You own:
the physical property
- ●
the benefit of the property
Therefore, you have the broadest ownership rights.
Example
Ali buys a house and no one else has a legal usufruct over it.
Ali owns:
House ✅
Right to live in it ✅
Right to rent its benefit ✅
Therefore:
Ali has total ownership.
7. What Can a Total Owner Do?
Subject to Islamic Law, the total owner may normally:
- use the property,
- live in it,
- benefit from it,
- sell it,
- gift it,
- lease it,
- lend it,
- invest in it,
- make it a waqf,
- include it in a will.
The reason he has broader powers is simple:
He owns both the thing and its benefit.
8. Example Using One House
Suppose Ali owns a house.
Situation A — Ali Owns Property Only
Ahmad has a five-year usufruct.
So:
Ali → house
Ahmad → right to live there
Ali cannot interfere with Ahmad’s five-year right.
Situation B — Ahmad Owns Usufruct Only
Ahmad may live in and benefit from the house according to his legal right.
But:
Ahmad cannot sell Ali’s house.
He owns:
the benefit
not:
the building itself
Situation C — Ali Owns Both
Ahmad’s five-year usufruct ends.
Now Ali has:
house + usufruct
Ali may:
- live there,
- lease it,
- sell it,
- gift it,
- otherwise lawfully deal with it.
This is:
Total Ownership
9. The Simplest Way to Remember It
Property only
“I own the thing, but someone else currently owns its benefit.”
Your power over the asset is therefore restricted by that person’s usufruct.
Usufruct only
“I do not own the thing, but I legally own the specified benefit.”
You may use and enjoy that benefit, but you cannot treat the physical asset as your own.
Property + Usufruct
“I own both the thing and its benefit.”
This gives you total ownership and the widest lawful powers over the property.
10. One Very Easy Example
Think of a car.
Ali owns the car, Ahmad rents it for one month.
During that month:
Ali → owns the physical car
Ahmad → owns/holds the one-month driving usufruct
Ahmad can:
drive the car ✅
but cannot:
sell the car ❌
Ali can say:
“That car belongs to me.” ✅
but cannot simply say:
“Give it back tomorrow; I want to drive it,” ❌
if Ahmad has a valid one-month contractual right.
After the month ends:
Car → Ali
- ●
Right to use car → Ali
=
Total Ownership
The key rule is:
Property ownership gives rights over the asset; usufruct ownership gives rights over its use and benefit; owning both gives total ownership.
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 245: Fraudulently Suffering Decree for Sum Not Due
Introduction
Section 245 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes a person who fraudulently allows a decree or order to be passed or executed against himself even though the amount, property, or interest claimed is not genuinely due.
The provision is directed at sham or collusive use of judicial decrees and orders. It covers a person who deliberately permits a false or excessive decree to be entered against him, or allows a decree to be executed against him even after it has already been satisfied.
The central idea is:
Fraudulently allowing a decree or order against oneself for something not truly due = Section 245
Q1. What does Section 245 provide?
Answer:
Section 245 punishes a person who fraudulently:
Causes or suffers a decree or order to be passed against himself:
For a sum not due;
For a larger sum than is due;
For property to which the claimant is not entitled; or
For an interest in property to which the claimant is not entitled;
or
Causes or suffers a decree or order to be executed against himself:
After it has already been satisfied; or
For anything in respect of which it has already been satisfied.
Q2. What is the object of Section 245?
Answer:
The section seeks to prevent fraudulent or collusive manipulation of Court decrees and orders.
A person cannot deliberately allow a false or excessive decree to be created against himself in order to:
Benefit another person;
Defeat a genuine creditor;
Divert property;
Manipulate execution proceedings;
Create an artificial liability;
Obtain some fraudulent advantage.
Core Principle
A person cannot use a sham decree against himself as a tool of fraud.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 245 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 245 BNS = Section 208 IPC
Q4. Has Section 245 changed under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
The language remains unchanged; and
The provision has been retained as it is.
Thus, no substantive change has been identified in the supplied material.
Q5. Who can commit the offence under Section 245?
Answer:
The section begins with:
“Whoever”
Therefore, it is a general offence.
However, the special feature of Section 245 is that the person fraudulently allows the decree or order to be:
Passed or executed against himself
Q6. What is the central mens rea under Section 245?
Answer:
The controlling word is:
“fraudulently”
Therefore, fraudulent intent is essential.
A mere mistake, negligence, or genuine legal dispute is not enough.
Q7. What are the two main branches of Section 245?
Answer:
The section has two broad branches:
Fraudulently causing or suffering a decree/order to be passed against oneself;
Fraudulently causing or suffering a decree/order to be executed against oneself after satisfaction.
Memory
PASS – EXECUTE
Q8. What does “causes or suffers a decree or order to be passed against him” mean?
Answer:
It means that the accused:
Actively causes the decree or order to be passed; or
Knowingly and fraudulently allows it to be passed against himself.
Thus, the provision covers both:
Active procurement
and
Fraudulent submission or allowance
Q9. What does “suffers” mean in this context?
Answer:
For study purposes, “suffers” means knowingly allows or permits the decree or order to be passed against oneself.
The person may not formally initiate the proceeding but fraudulently allows the false liability to be created.
Q10. Why is the phrase “against him” important?
Answer:
Because Section 245 concerns a person who fraudulently permits a false or excessive decree:
Against himself
This is the key distinction from Section 247, where a person fraudulently obtains a decree or order:
Against another person
Q11. What is the first monetary situation covered?
Answer:
The section covers a decree or order passed:
For a sum not due
This means that no money is genuinely owed to the claimant.
Q12. Give an example of a sum not due.
Answer:
Suppose A owes B nothing.
A and B collude, and A fraudulently allows B to obtain a decree against him for ₹5 lakh.
Section 245 may apply.
Q13. What is the second monetary situation covered?
Answer:
The section also applies where the decree or order is for:
A larger sum than is due
Here, some liability may exist, but the decree exceeds the genuine amount owed.
Q14. Give an example of a larger sum than due.
Answer:
Suppose A genuinely owes B ₹1 lakh.
A fraudulently allows B to obtain a decree against him for ₹5 lakh.
The excessive amount falls within Section 245.
Q15. Must the entire decree be false?
Answer:
No.
The section expressly covers a decree for:
A larger sum than is due
Therefore, even where some amount is genuinely owed, fraudulent inflation of the decree may attract the provision.
Q16. Does Section 245 apply only to money claims?
Answer:
No.
The provision also covers:
Property; and
An interest in property.
Q17. What is the property-related branch?
Answer:
The section applies where a person fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order against himself for:
Property or an interest in property to which the claimant is not entitled
Q18. Give an example involving property.
Answer:
Suppose A owns certain land and B has no right to it.
A fraudulently allows B to obtain a decree declaring B entitled to that land in order to defeat A's genuine creditors.
Section 245 may apply.
Q19. Give an example involving an interest in property.
Answer:
Suppose B has no genuine share in A's property.
A nevertheless fraudulently allows a Court order declaring that B owns a one-half interest in it.
Section 245 may apply.
Q20. What is the second major branch of Section 245?
Answer:
The second branch concerns fraudulent execution of a decree or order:
Against the accused after it has already been satisfied
Q21. What does “satisfied” mean here?
Answer:
It means that the obligation under the decree or order has already been fulfilled.
For example:
Payment has already been made;
Property has already been delivered;
The obligation has otherwise been discharged.
Q22. Why is execution after satisfaction punishable?
Answer:
Because allowing execution after the obligation has been discharged can be used fraudulently to:
Artificially reduce the accused’s property;
Benefit another person;
Defeat creditors;
Create a false appearance of liability.
Q23. Does Section 245 cover partial satisfaction?
Answer:
Yes.
The section also covers execution:
“for anything in respect of which it has been satisfied”
Thus, where part of the decree has already been satisfied, fraudulent execution for that satisfied part may still attract liability.
Q24. Give an example of partial satisfaction.
Answer:
Suppose a decree is for ₹4 lakh and A has already paid ₹3 lakh.
A fraudulently permits execution against himself for the full ₹4 lakh.
The execution concerning the already satisfied ₹3 lakh may fall within Section 245.
Q25. Must the decree have originally been fraudulent?
Answer:
No.
The second branch can apply even where the original decree was valid.
The fraud may arise later when the person allows execution:
After the decree has already been satisfied
Q26. Must actual property be taken in execution?
Answer:
The section focuses on fraudulently causing or suffering the decree or order:
To be executed against him
It does not expressly require that the execution ultimately results in successful recovery.
Q27. Is actual loss to a creditor expressly required?
Answer:
No.
The statutory text does not expressly require actual loss.
The offence focuses on fraudulent causing or suffering of the decree or execution.
Q28. What does the Illustration explain?
Answer:
The Illustration provides:
A institutes a suit against Z;
Z expects A is likely to obtain a decree against him;
Z then fraudulently allows B, who has no just claim against Z, to obtain a decree against him for a larger amount;
The purpose is that B may share in the proceeds of any sale of Z’s property made under A’s decree;
B may benefit either for himself or for Z.
The Illustration concludes that:
Z commits an offence under Section 245
Q29. What is the basic fraud in the Illustration?
Answer:
Z deliberately creates a false or inflated liability in favour of B.
This false decree can then compete with or interfere with A's genuine claim against Z's property.
Q30. Why does Z allow a false decree against himself?
Answer:
According to the Illustration, Z does so so that B may share in the proceeds of the sale of Z's property.
The arrangement may benefit:
B personally; or
Z through B.
Thus, the false decree is being used as a fraudulent device.
Q31. What does the Illustration teach about collusion?
Answer:
It demonstrates how Section 245 can apply to a collusive decree.
A defendant cannot deliberately allow another person with no genuine claim to obtain a decree against him for the purpose of manipulating the distribution of his property.
Q32. Is collusion expressly mentioned in the section?
Answer:
No.
The statutory word is:
Fraudulently
However, the Illustration demonstrates a classic situation of fraudulent collusion.
Q33. Must the person benefiting from the false decree have a genuine claim?
Answer:
No.
Indeed, one of the central situations covered is where the person is:
Not entitled
to the sum, property, or property interest.
Q34. Is a bona fide consent decree automatically criminal?
Answer:
No.
The essential ingredient is fraud.
Parties may lawfully resolve disputes or consent to decrees where there is a legitimate basis.
Section 245 is concerned with fraudulent use of decrees or orders.
Q35. Is a genuine compromise covered merely because one side receives more than originally expected?
Answer:
Not automatically.
A genuine and lawful compromise is different from fraudulently allowing a decree for something not due or not entitled.
The prosecution must establish fraudulent conduct within the wording of Section 245.
Q36. Is negligence sufficient?
Answer:
No.
The section requires:
Fraudulently
A careless failure to contest a proceeding is not automatically a criminal offence.
Q37. Is mere non-appearance in Court sufficient?
Answer:
No.
A person may fail to appear for many reasons.
Section 245 requires that he fraudulently causes or suffers the decree or order to be passed against him for something not genuinely due or entitled.
Q38. Is merely losing a case enough?
Answer:
No.
A decree being passed against a person does not by itself establish Section 245.
There must be fraudulent conduct.
Memory
DECREE AGAINST YOU ≠ SECTION 245
FRAUDULENTLY ALLOW FALSE DECREE AGAINST YOU = SECTION 245
Q39. Does Section 245 require dishonest intention specifically?
Answer:
The supplied text specifically uses:
Fraudulently
Therefore, the prosecution must establish the fraudulent character of the conduct according to the statutory wording.
Q40. Is a decree or order necessary?
Answer:
Yes.
Section 245 specifically deals with:
A decree or order
either being passed or executed against the accused.
Q41. How does Section 245 differ from Section 246?
Answer:
Section 245
Concerns fraudulently allowing a decree or order to be passed or executed:
Against oneself
Memory
FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF
Section 246
Concerns knowingly making:
A false claim in Court
with fraud, dishonesty, or intent to injure or annoy.
Memory
FALSE CLAIM
Q42. How does Section 245 differ from Section 247?
Answer:
This is one of the most important comparisons.
Section 245
The accused fraudulently causes or suffers a decree/order:
Against himself
for something not due or not entitled.
Section 247
The accused fraudulently obtains a decree/order:
Against another person
for something not due or not entitled.
Memory
245 = FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF
247 = FALSE DECREE AGAINST ANOTHER
Q43. What is the simplest way to distinguish Sections 245 and 247?
Answer:
Ask:
WHO IS THE DECREE AGAINST?
If the person fraudulently permits it:
Against himself → Section 245
If the person fraudulently obtains it:
Against another → Section 247
Q44. How does the execution branch differ between Sections 245 and 247?
Answer:
Section 245
The accused fraudulently causes or suffers an already satisfied decree to be executed:
Against himself
Section 247
The accused fraudulently causes an already satisfied decree to be executed:
Against another person
Memory
245 = SUFFER EXECUTION
247 = CAUSE EXECUTION
Q45. How does Section 245 differ from Section 248?
Answer:
Section 245
Fraudulent decree/order against oneself.
Section 248
False criminal proceeding or false accusation of an offence with intent to injure and knowledge of absence of lawful ground.
Memory
245 = FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Q46. What is the punishment under Section 245?
Answer:
The punishment is:
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years; or
Fine; or
Both.
Q47. What does “imprisonment of either description” mean?
Answer:
It means:
Simple imprisonment; or
Rigorous imprisonment.
Q48. What is the maximum imprisonment?
Answer:
2 years
Q49. Is a specific maximum fine stated?
Answer:
No.
The supplied text provides:
Fine, or both
without specifying a particular monetary ceiling.
Q50. What is the classification under Section 245?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
Non-Cognizable
Bailable
Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
NC + B + MFC
Q51. Is Section 245 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
It is:
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q52. Is Section 245 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
It is:
BAILABLE
Q53. Which Court may try Section 245?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS
Q54. What is the easiest examination test for Section 245?
Answer:
Ask:
Was there a decree or order?
Was it passed or executed against the accused himself?
Did the accused cause or suffer it?
Was the decree/order for:
A sum not due;
A larger sum than due;
Property not entitled;
An interest in property not entitled?
Alternatively, had the decree/order already been satisfied?
Was the accused acting fraudulently?
Q55. What are the four main subject matters to remember?
Answer:
The decree/order may concern:
Sum not due
Larger sum than due
Property not entitled
Interest in property not entitled
Memory
NO SUM – EXCESS SUM – PROPERTY – PROPERTY INTEREST
Q56. What are the core action words?
Answer:
CAUSE
SUFFER
PASS
EXECUTE
The central idea is fraudulent allowance of judicial liability against oneself.
Q57. What is the most important word in the provision?
Answer:
FRAUDULENTLY
Without fraud, the special criminal character of Section 245 is absent.
Q58. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“FRAUDULENTLY ALLOW A FALSE DECREE AGAINST YOURSELF = 245.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Nature of the Offence
Section 245 deals with:
FRAUDULENT JUDICIAL LIABILITY CREATED AGAINST SELF
2. First Branch — Decree or Order Passed
The accused fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be passed against himself for:
A sum not due;
A larger sum than due;
Property not entitled;
Interest in property not entitled.
3. Second Branch — Decree or Order Executed
The accused fraudulently causes or suffers a decree/order to be executed against himself:
After satisfaction; or
For a part already satisfied.
4. Mens Rea
The conduct must be:
FRAUDULENT
Mere carelessness, mistake, or genuine compromise is insufficient.
Illustration Study Notes
The statutory Illustration shows:
A has a genuine claim against Z;
Z expects A may obtain a decree;
Z fraudulently allows B, who has no just claim, to obtain a larger decree;
The objective is to enable B to share in proceeds of any sale of Z’s property;
The arrangement may benefit B or Z.
Core Lesson
A SHAM DECREE AGAINST SELF MAY BE USED TO DEFEAT OR DILUTE A GENUINE CREDITOR
That is precisely the type of fraud Section 245 seeks to punish.
Punishment Notes
Section 245 provides:
UP TO 2 YEARS
or:
FINE
or:
BOTH
Classification Notes
Section 245 is:
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS
Memory
NC + B + MFC
IPC Equivalent and BNS Position
According to the supplied comments:
Section 245 BNS = Section 208 IPC
The supplied comments state that:
The language remains unchanged;
The provision has been retained as it is.
Difference Between Sections 245, 246 and 247
Section 245 — False Decree Against Self
The person fraudulently allows a decree/order:
AGAINST HIMSELF
Memory
SUFFER FALSE DECREE
Section 246 — False Claim in Court
The person knowingly makes:
A FALSE CLAIM IN COURT
with the required wrongful mental state.
Memory
MAKE FALSE CLAIM
Section 247 — False Decree Against Another
The person fraudulently obtains or executes a decree/order:
AGAINST ANOTHER PERSON
Memory
OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
Three-Section Core Memory
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246 = MAKE FALSE CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
Even Simpler Comparison
245
AGAINST SELF
246
CLAIM IN COURT
247
AGAINST ANOTHER
Quick Revision Notes
Section
245 BNS
Title
Fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due
IPC Equivalent
Section 208 IPC
First Act
Fraudulently cause or suffer decree/order to be passed against oneself.
Subject Matter
Sum not due;
Larger sum than due;
Property not entitled;
Interest in property not entitled.
Second Act
Fraudulently cause or suffer decree/order to be executed against oneself after satisfaction.
Mens Rea
Fraudulently
Punishment
Up to 2 years / fine / both
Classification
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate First Class
BNS Change
None stated in the supplied comments.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every decree against a person attracts Section 245
Incorrect.
The person must:
FRAUDULENTLY CAUSE OR SUFFER IT
Trap 2 — Forgetting that the decree is against the accused himself
This is the defining feature.
245 = AGAINST SELF
Trap 3 — Thinking the entire amount must be false
Incorrect.
The section covers:
A LARGER SUM THAN IS DUE
Trap 4 — Restricting the section to money
Incorrect.
It also covers:
Property;
Interest in property.
Trap 5 — Forgetting execution after satisfaction
Even a valid original decree can later be fraudulently executed after satisfaction.
Trap 6 — Thinking only full satisfaction counts
Incorrect.
The section also covers anything:
IN RESPECT OF WHICH IT HAS BEEN SATISFIED
Trap 7 — Treating a genuine consent decree as automatically criminal
Incorrect.
Fraud is essential.
Trap 8 — Treating mere failure to contest as sufficient
Incorrect.
The accused must fraudulently suffer the decree.
Trap 9 — Confusing Section 245 with Section 247
Remember:
245 = DECREE AGAINST SELF
247 = DECREE AGAINST ANOTHER
Trap 10 — Confusing Section 245 with Section 246
Remember:
245 = SUFFER DECREE
246 = MAKE FALSE CLAIM
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 245–248
245
Fraudulently allow false/excessive decree against oneself.
Memory
SUFFER FALSE DECREE
246
Knowingly make false claim in Court.
Memory
FALSE CLAIM
247
Fraudulently obtain or execute decree/order against another for something not due.
Memory
OBTAIN FALSE DECREE
248
Knowingly institute false criminal proceeding or charge with intent to injure.
Memory
FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Best Four-Section Memory Sequence
245 = SUFFER
246 = CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN
248 = ACCUSE
Or more fully:
245 = SUFFER FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF
246 = MAKE FALSE CLAIM
247 = OBTAIN FALSE DECREE AGAINST ANOTHER
248 = MAKE FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 245
FRAUDULENTLY
+
CAUSE OR SUFFER DECREE/ORDER AGAINST YOURSELF
FOR
SUM NOT DUE
LARGER SUM THAN DUE
PROPERTY NOT ENTITLED
INTEREST IN PROPERTY NOT ENTITLED
OR
CAUSE/SUFFER EXECUTION AFTER SATISFACTION
= SECTION 245
Shortest Memory Rule
“FRAUDULENTLY LET A FALSE DECREE BE PASSED OR EXECUTED AGAINST YOURSELF = 245.”
Key Takeaway
Section 245 BNS punishes a person who fraudulently creates or allows a false judicial liability against himself.
It covers:
A decree or order for:
A sum not due;
A larger sum than due;
Property not entitled;
An interest in property not entitled;
Fraudulent execution against the accused after the decree/order has already been fully or partly satisfied.
The statutory Illustration demonstrates the classic situation: a debtor fraudulently permits a sham creditor to obtain a false decree so that the sham creditor may share in proceeds that would otherwise go toward satisfaction of a genuine creditor’s decree.
The core mens rea is:
FRAUDULENTLY
The punishment is:
Up to 2 years / fine / both
The offence is:
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate of the First Class
According to the supplied comments:
Section 245 BNS = Section 208 IPC
and the provision has been retained without substantive change.
Final Memory Line
“245 = FRAUD + FALSE DECREE AGAINST SELF + NOT DUE/EXCESS/NO ENTITLEMENT OR EXECUTION AFTER SATISFACTION.”
- Published on
Islamic Law of Transaction: Ownership of the Property Alone
1. What Does “Ownership of the Property Alone” Mean?
Sometimes one person owns the physical property, while another person owns its usufruct.
Remember:
Property = the actual thing
Examples:
- house,
- land,
- building.
Usufruct (manfa‘ah) = the legal right to use and benefit from that property
Examples:
- living in a house,
- farming land,
- using a building.
So it is possible for ownership to be divided like this:
Person A → owns the property itself
Person B → owns the usufruct
This is a form of partial ownership because one person does not possess both elements at the same time.
2. Example Through a Will
A common example is a will (wasiyyah).
Wasiyyah
A wasiyyah is an instruction made by a person concerning property that is intended to take effect after his death, subject to Islamic legal rules.
Example
Ali owns a house.
In his will, Ali states:
“After my death, Ahmad may live in my house for ten years.”
Ali later dies.
What happens?
The physical house passes to Ali’s heirs through inheritance.
However, Ahmad receives the right to live in the house for ten years.
So:
Physical house → Ali’s heirs
Ten-year usufruct → Ahmad
The ownership has therefore been divided.
3. Another Example — Lifetime Usufruct
Suppose Ali writes in his will:
“After my death, Yusuf may cultivate my farmland for the rest of his life.”
When Ali dies:
Ali’s heirs → own the farmland itself
while:
Yusuf → owns the right to cultivate and benefit from the farmland during his lifetime
Therefore, the heirs own the property, but they do not presently possess its full benefit.
4. What Happens When the Usufruct Period Ends?
When the period of usufruct finishes, the temporary separation ends.
Example
Ali’s heirs own the house.
Ahmad has the right to live there for ten years.
During those ten years:
Heirs → physical property
Ahmad → usufruct
After ten years:
Ahmad’s usufruct ends
↓
the usufruct returns to the heirs
↓
the heirs now have property + usufruct
↓
Total Ownership
So the heirs’ ownership becomes complete.
5. Why Is the Heirs’ Ownership Initially Partial?
The heirs own the actual property, but another person owns its current benefit.
Therefore:
Property ownership ✅
Present usufruct ❌
This means they have:
Partial Ownership
When the usufruct later returns to them:
Property ✅
- ●
Usufruct ✅
=
Total Ownership
6. Can the Property Owner Use the Property During Someone Else’s Usufruct?
Normally, the owner cannot use the property in a way that interferes with the usufruct that legally belongs to another person.
Example
Ali’s heirs own a house.
Ahmad has been legally given the right to live there for ten years.
The heirs cannot simply say:
“We own the house, so we will move in too.”
Why?
Because Ahmad currently owns the legally recognized benefit of living in the house.
The heirs own:
the physical property
but Ahmad owns:
the present usufruct
Therefore, the heirs must respect Ahmad’s legal right.
7. Can the Property Owner Deal With the Usufruct?
No, not as though the usufruct still belongs to him.
If the usufruct has already been legally given to another person, the physical property owner cannot transfer or use that same usufruct for himself during the specified period.
Example
The heirs own the house.
Ahmad has the right to live there for five years.
The heirs cannot normally rent the same residential benefit to Yusuf for those same five years.
Why?
Because:
the present usufruct already belongs to Ahmad
They cannot give another person a benefit that they do not presently control.
8. What About Dealing With the Property Itself?
The passage explains that while another person owns the usufruct, the owner of the property is also restricted in dealing with the physical property.
The main idea is:
Ownership of the physical property cannot be exercised in a way that destroys or defeats the existing usufruct right.
Example
The heirs own a house, while Ahmad has the right to live there for ten years.
The heirs cannot simply destroy the house or otherwise deal with it in a way that makes Ahmad’s usufruct impossible.
The existing usufruct must be respected.
So:
Physical ownership
does not allow the owner to ignore:
another person’s legally established usufruct
9. The Property Must Be Given to the Usufruct Holder
The owner of the physical property is required to make the property available to the person who owns its usufruct.
Example
Ahmad has a valid right under a will to live in a house for ten years.
The heirs inherit the house.
The heirs must allow Ahmad to take possession of the house so that he can actually enjoy the benefit given to him.
So:
Ahmad has usufruct
↓
heirs must deliver access to the house
↓
Ahmad can exercise his legal right
10. What If the Property Owner Refuses?
The passage explains that the owner may be compelled to deliver the property to the usufruct holder.
Coerced / Compelled
This means that legal authority may force a person to perform an obligation that he refuses to perform voluntarily.
Example
Ali’s will gives Ahmad the right to use farmland for five years.
Ali’s heirs inherit the land but refuse to allow Ahmad onto it.
If Ahmad’s usufruct is legally valid:
heirs refuse access
↓
Ahmad’s right is being prevented
↓
legal authority may compel the heirs
↓
land must be made available to Ahmad
This shows that usufruct is more than mere permission.
It is a legal right that can be enforced.
11. This Example Shows Why Usufruct Is Different From Mere Permission
Suppose Ali merely tells Ahmad:
“You may use my garden tomorrow.”
That may simply be permission.
But suppose Ahmad has a legally valid usufruct under a will.
Then:
Ahmad is not merely asking for permission
He already has:
a legally established right to the benefit
This is why the property owner may even be compelled to allow him access.
So:
Mere Permission
“You may use it because I allow you.”
Usufruct
“I have a legal right to use it, and the property owner must respect that right.”
12. Ownership of the Physical Property Is Normally Permanent
The passage explains that ownership of the physical property itself is generally perpetual, meaning it does not automatically expire after a fixed period.
Perpetual
Perpetual means continuing without a fixed ending date.
Example
The heirs inherit a house.
Their ownership is not:
“for ten years only.”
They continue to own the house even while Ahmad has a temporary right to live there.
So:
Heirs’ ownership of property → continues
while:
Ahmad’s usufruct → may be temporary
13. Why Does Ownership of the Property Eventually Become Total Ownership?
Because temporary usufruct normally comes to an end.
When it ends, the property owner again receives the benefit.
Example
Heirs own land.
Yusuf has the right to farm it for five years.
During the five years:
Heirs → property
Yusuf → usufruct
After five years:
Yusuf’s usufruct ends
↓
usufruct returns to heirs
↓
heirs have property + benefit
↓
Total Ownership
This is why the passage says that ownership of the property alone normally ends in total ownership.
14. Ownership of Usufruct Is Usually Temporary
Unlike physical property ownership, usufruct is commonly limited by:
- a fixed number of years,
- the lifetime of a person,
- another agreed or legally defined period.
Example 1 — Fixed Period
Ahmad has the right to live in a house for:
10 years
After ten years:
right ends
Example 2 — Lifetime
Yusuf has the right to farm land:
for the rest of his life
When Yusuf dies:
the lifetime usufruct ends
subject to the rules governing that arrangement.
So usufruct is usually:
temporary or limited
rather than permanent.
15. There Are Exceptions
The passage notes that there are some exceptions where a usufruct or benefit may continue for a much longer or permanent purpose.
One example mentioned is:
Waqf
A waqf is property permanently dedicated for a religious, charitable, family, or social purpose.
A waqf may create continuing benefits for its beneficiaries.
So although usufruct is normally temporary:
some legally established benefits may continue permanently or for an indefinite period.
16. The Hanafi Position on Inheriting Usufruct
The passage specifically mentions the Hanafi school.
According to the rule stated in the passage:
Hanafi jurists held that usufruct is generally not inherited in the same way as the physical property itself.
This helps explain why usufruct is usually treated as temporary in this discussion.
Simple Example
Suppose Ahmad personally has a right to use a house for his lifetime.
Ahmad dies.
According to the Hanafi approach referred to in the passage, that usufruct does not automatically pass to Ahmad’s heirs merely because they are his heirs.
Instead, the right may end according to the terms and nature of the usufruct.
17. Important: Do Not Confuse the Two Different Inheritances
There are two different things here.
First: Inheritance of the Physical Property
Ali dies.
His children inherit his house.
So:
House itself → heirs
Second: Existing Usufruct Belonging to Someone Else
Ali’s will gave Ahmad the right to live in that house for ten years.
So:
Usufruct → Ahmad for ten years
The heirs inherit the house subject to Ahmad’s existing usufruct.
Therefore:
Inheriting the property does not automatically cancel another person’s valid usufruct.
18. One Complete Example
Suppose Abdullah owns a farm.
His will states:
“After my death, Bilal may cultivate this farm for fifteen years.”
Abdullah dies.
Step 1 — Physical Property
Abdullah’s children inherit the farm.
So:
Farm → children
Step 2 — Usufruct
Bilal receives the right to cultivate the farm for fifteen years.
So:
Farming benefit → Bilal
Step 3 — During the Fifteen Years
The children remain owners of the physical land.
But they cannot simply:
- occupy the land in a way that prevents Bilal farming it,
- take Bilal’s farming benefit for themselves,
- interfere with his valid usufruct.
They must allow Bilal to use the land according to his legal right.
Step 4 — Children Refuse Access
If the children refuse to allow Bilal onto the land:
Bilal has a legal usufruct
↓
children are preventing his right
↓
legal authority may compel them to give access
Step 5 — Fifteen Years End
Bilal’s usufruct finishes.
Now the children possess:
the farm
- ●
the right to use the farm
Therefore:
Their ownership becomes total.
19. The Full Flow of Understanding
Start with:
Person owns property + usufruct
↓
Total Ownership
Then the owner creates a future usufruct through a will.
↓
Owner dies.
↓
Physical property passes to:
heirs
while usufruct passes to:
person named in the will
↓
Now:
Heirs → property only
Beneficiary → usufruct only
↓
Partial Ownership
↓
Usufruct period ends.
↓
Usufruct returns to heirs.
↓
Property + usufruct
↓
Total Ownership Again
20. Why Is the Physical Owner Restricted?
A student may ask:
“If the heirs own the house, why can’t they use it?”
Because ownership of the house and ownership of its current benefit are temporarily separated.
The heirs own:
the structure/property
But the beneficiary owns:
the current legally recognized use
Example
The heirs own the house.
Ahmad owns the right to live there until 2035.
The heirs cannot say:
“But our name is on the ownership, so Ahmad must leave.”
Their ownership is currently limited by Ahmad’s valid usufruct.
This is the meaning of:
Partial Ownership
21. Does the Usufruct Holder Become Owner of the House?
No.
This is equally important.
Ahmad may have the right to live in the house for ten years.
But Ahmad cannot normally say:
“Therefore the house itself belongs to me.”
It does not.
So:
Usufruct holder → owns/holds the benefit
Property owner → owns the physical asset
They own different legal interests.
22. Direct Questions and Answers
Question 1: What is ownership of the property alone?
Answer:
It means a person owns the physical property while another person owns its current usufruct.
Question 2: Can this happen through a will?
Answer: Yes.
A person may leave someone the right to:
- live in his house,
- cultivate his land,
- use another property,
for a fixed period or sometimes for that person’s lifetime.
Question 3: Who owns the property after the original owner dies?
Answer:
The physical property may pass to the deceased’s lawful heirs through inheritance.
Question 4: Who owns the usufruct?
Answer:
The person named in the valid arrangement holds the usufruct for the period stated.
Question 5: Can the heirs use the property during that period?
Answer:
Not in a way that interferes with the usufruct belonging to the other person.
Question 6: Must the heirs give the usufruct holder access?
Answer: Yes.
The property must be made available so that the usufruct holder can exercise his legal right.
Question 7: What if the heirs refuse?
Answer:
The passage states that they may be legally compelled to deliver the property or provide access.
Question 8: What happens when the usufruct ends?
Answer:
The usufruct returns to the physical property owner.
Then:
Property + usufruct
become united again.
This creates:
Total Ownership
Question 9: Is ownership of the physical property usually temporary?
Answer: No.
It is generally perpetual and continues unless lawfully transferred or otherwise ended.
Question 10: Is usufruct usually temporary?
Answer: Yes.
It is often:
- for a fixed time,
- for a person’s lifetime,
- or subject to another limitation.
There can, however, be special exceptions such as continuing waqf benefits.
Question 11: What is the Hanafi view mentioned in the passage?
Answer:
The passage states that the Hanafi school generally does not treat usufruct as something inherited in the same way as physical property.
Therefore, a personal usufruct may end rather than automatically pass to the usufruct holder’s heirs.
23. Most Important Rule to Remember
A person may own the physical property while someone else owns its usufruct. During that period, the physical owner must respect the usufruct holder’s legal right. When the usufruct ends, the physical owner’s partial ownership normally becomes total ownership.
24. Easy Memory Formula
During the usufruct:
Heirs → Property
Beneficiary → Usufruct
=
Partial Ownership
↓
When the usufruct ends:
Heirs → Property + Usufruct
=
Total Ownership
25. One-Sentence Exam Rule
Ownership of the property alone occurs when the physical asset belongs to one person while its usufruct belongs to another; once the temporary usufruct ends, both elements normally reunite in the property owner, creating total ownership.
- Published on
Islamic Law of Transaction: Meaning of Usufruct, Benefit, and Mere Permission
Yes. The word “benefit” (manfa‘ah) is the part that often causes confusion.
1. What Exactly Is the “Benefit”?
The benefit is the useful function or enjoyment that comes from an asset without consuming the asset itself.
For example:
- the house is the asset; living in it is the benefit,
- the car is the asset; driving it is the benefit,
- the land is the asset; farming it or passing across it is the benefit,
- the shop is the asset; occupying it for business is the benefit.
So, benefit does not mean financial profit. It means the useful service or utility produced by the property.
In an ijarah (lease), that benefit must normally be lawful, identifiable, capable of being provided, and sufficiently clear—for example, what property is being used, how it may be used, and for what period. (tafhim.ikim.gov.my)
A simple formula is:
Asset = the thing
Manfa‘ah = what the thing enables you to do
2. How Is a Legal Right to the Benefit Different from Mere Permission?
The strongest question to ask is:
Has the benefit itself been legally given to me for a defined purpose or period, or is the owner simply allowing me to use his property?
3. Example 1 — Legal Right to Usufruct
Ali owns a house.
Ali leases it to Ahmad for one year.
The agreement gives Ahmad the right to live in the house for that year.
So:
House → Ali owns it
One-year residential benefit → Ahmad has the legal right to it
Ahmad’s right does not depend simply on Ali continuing to be friendly with him. It comes from the lease agreement.
In Islamic jurisprudence, ijarah is treated as transferring the usufruct or benefit to the tenant for the agreed period. (muftiwp.gov.my)
4. Example 2 — Mere Permission
Ali owns a house and tells his friend Yusuf:
“You can stay in my guest room tonight.”
Yusuf can use the room, but Ali has not necessarily transferred a separate ownership interest in the benefit of the house.
Yusuf is there because:
Ali gave him permission.
So:
Ali → owns house and its benefit
Yusuf → personally permitted to use part of it
This is closer to permission to use, rather than full milk al-manfa‘ah — ownership of usufruct.
5. The Best Practical Tests
You can distinguish them by looking at the legal arrangement:
- Source of the right: a lease, will, waqf, easement, or another legal arrangement can create a stronger right to the benefit; casual consent normally indicates permission.
- Can the owner simply withdraw it? A valid tenant normally has an enforceable right for the agreed lease period. Mere permission is normally more dependent on the permission given.
- Can the holder deal with the benefit? In the Maliki distinction, a person who owns the usufruct may have authority to use it himself or allow another person to use it, subject to the agreement; someone with mere personal permission generally cannot transfer that permission to another person. (oarep.usim.edu.my)
- Is the benefit clearly defined? A formal usufruct will often specify the asset, duration, type of use, and limits. (tafhim.ikim.gov.my)
- Was money paid? Payment is strong evidence in an ijarah, but payment is not the ultimate test. A benefit can arise through other legal arrangements as well.
There is also a school-of-law qualification: the terminology is not completely identical among the madhhabs. The Maliki treatment makes a particularly clear distinction between milk al-manfa‘ah (ownership of benefit) and haqq/intifā‘ (personal permission or limited right to use), while Hanafi treatments may characterize these concepts differently. (oarep.usim.edu.my)
6. What Documentation Proves Usufruct?
Yes, documentation can be very important, but the document itself is evidence of the right; it is not what makes every use a usufruct.
For example, usufruct may be evidenced by:
- a lease/ijarah agreement stating that Ahmad may occupy an apartment for two years,
- a will (wasiyyah) stating that Fatimah may live in a house for her lifetime,
- a waqf instrument giving beneficiaries the use of property,
- a document establishing an easement, such as a permanent right of way over neighboring land.
Islamic jurisprudence recognizes usufruct interests arising through arrangements such as leases and wills, with some differences among schools regarding other forms. (islamansiklopedisi.org.tr)
A lease document, for instance, should make the usufruct clear by identifying matters such as the asset, type or extent of use, period, and rent. (tafhim.ikim.gov.my)
7. Can Mere Permission Also Be Written?
Yes.
For example:
“I give Yusuf permission to park his car here this week.”
This is written, but writing it down does not automatically convert it into ownership of usufruct.
You must read what rights the document actually gives.
8. Very Simple Example
Suppose Ali owns an apartment.
Document A says:
“Ahmad rents Apartment 10 from 1 January to 31 December for RM2,000 per month and has the right to occupy it as a residence.”
That strongly indicates:
legal right to usufruct.
Document B says:
“I permit Yusuf to stay in my apartment while I am overseas.”
That sounds much more like:
personal permission to use.
9. The Key Question
Do not ask only:
“Is he using the property?”
Ask:
“What legal right does he have over the benefit?”
That is the real difference.
10. Simplest Rule to Remember
Usufruct
“The benefit has legally been assigned to me.”
Mere Permission
“The benefit still belongs to the owner, but he allows me to enjoy it.”
- Published on
Islamic Law of transaction - Usufruct means the legal right to use and benefit from property without owning the physical property itself.
For example, if Ali owns a house and rents it to Ahmad for one year, Ali owns the house, while Ahmad has the usufruct — the right to live in and benefit from the house during that year.
The difference from mere permission is that usufruct is a legal right over the benefit, while permission is only an allowance to use.
- Usufruct: “I have a legal right to this benefit.”
- Mere permission: “The owner is allowing me to use it.”
Example of usufruct
Ali leases his car to Yusuf for one week.
Yusuf has a legally established right to use the car for that week.
Car ownership → Ali
Usufruct → Yusuf
Example of mere permission
Ali tells Omar:
“You may use my car this afternoon.”
Omar can use it, but he does not necessarily own any legal interest in the car’s benefit. He is simply using it because Ali allowed him.
The easiest rule to remember is:
Usufruct = ownership or legal entitlement to the benefit.
Permission = lawful use without ownership of the benefit.
This is why a tenant usually has a stronger legal position than a guest. A tenant’s right comes from a contract such as ijarah (lease), while a guest normally uses the property only because the owner or lawful user permitted it.
- Published on
Islamic Law of Transaction: Types of Ownership
1. The Two Main Types of Ownership
In Islamic Law, ownership is divided into two main types:
1. Total Ownership
This means owning:
the property itself + its usufruct
2. Partial Ownership
This means owning:
the property without its usufruct
OR
the usufruct without owning the property itself
Before going further, two terms must be clear.
Property
Property means the actual thing that is owned.
Examples:
- a house,
- a car,
- land,
- a shop,
- a building.
Usufruct — Manfa‘ah
Usufruct means the benefit or use that comes from property.
Examples:
- living in a house,
- driving a car,
- using a shop,
- farming land,
- using machinery.
So remember:
Property = the thing itself
Usufruct = the benefit gained from using it
2. Total Ownership
Total ownership means that the same person owns:
- the actual property, and
- the right to use and benefit from it.
Simple Formula
Property + Usufruct = Total Ownership
Example
Ali buys a house and lives in it.
Ali owns:
- the actual house, and
- the right to live in it, rent it, or otherwise benefit from it.
Therefore:
Ali has total ownership.
3. What Rights Does a Total Owner Have?
A person with total ownership normally has all lawful rights connected with the property.
The owner may:
- use the property,
- benefit from it,
- invest in it,
- sell it,
- give it as a gift,
- include it in a will,
- make it a waqf,
- lend it,
- lease it.
However, these rights must still be exercised according to Islamic Law.
So:
Total ownership gives broad rights, but those rights are still subject to Shari‘ah.
4. Important Terms
Sale
A sale means transferring ownership of property to another person in exchange for payment.
Example
Ali sells his car to Ahmad.
After the valid sale:
Ahmad becomes the new owner.
Gift
A gift means transferring property to another person without taking payment in return.
Example
Fatimah gives her laptop to Aisha as a gift.
Aisha becomes the owner.
Will — Wasiyyah
A will is an instruction about property that is intended to take effect after a person’s death, subject to Islamic legal rules.
Waqf
A waqf is property permanently dedicated for a religious, charitable, family, or social purpose.
The original text uses the word mortmain, but waqf is the clearer Islamic term.
Example
A person dedicates a building to be used permanently as an Islamic school.
Lending
Lending means allowing another person to use something temporarily without transferring ownership of the actual property.
Example
Ali lends his bicycle to Yusuf.
Ali remains the owner.
Lease — Ijarah
A lease, or ijarah, is an agreement where a person gives another person the right to use a property or benefit for an agreed payment.
Example
Ali owns a house.
He rents it to Ahmad for RM1,500 per month.
Ali remains the owner of the house.
Ahmad receives the right to live in and use the house during the lease.
5. Total Ownership Normally Has No Fixed Time Limit
Total ownership normally continues for as long as:
- the property continues to exist, and
- ownership has not been legally transferred to another person.
It does not automatically end after a fixed number of years.
Example
Ali buys a piece of land.
If he does not:
- sell it,
- gift it,
- transfer it, or
- lose ownership through another lawful reason,
he continues to own it.
So:
Valid ownership
↓
continues
↓
until lawfully transferred or the property no longer exists
6. What Does “Unconditional Ownership” Mean?
The source describes total ownership as unconditional.
This does not mean:
“The owner can do absolutely anything he wants.”
Instead, it means that the ownership itself is not limited to a fixed period in the way a lease or temporary usufruct may be.
The owner must still obey Islamic Law.
Example
Ali may permanently own a building.
But he cannot use that building for something prohibited under Islamic Law.
So:
Permanent ownership does not mean unlimited freedom.
7. Ownership Cannot Simply Be Dropped to Make Property Ownerless
The source explains that a person cannot simply make owned property ownerless by saying:
“I give up my ownership.”
The property must still have an owner until ownership is lawfully transferred or otherwise dealt with according to law.
Example
Ali owns a valuable horse.
Ali says:
“I no longer want to own this horse.”
According to the rule explained in the text, those words alone do not automatically make the horse ownerless.
Ali remains the owner unless ownership is lawfully transferred.
8. Example of Usurped Property
The source gives the example of usurpation.
What Is Usurpation — Ghasb?
Usurpation means wrongfully taking or controlling another person’s property without permission.
The person who does this is called a usurper.
Example
Ahmad wrongfully takes control of Ali’s land.
Ali becomes angry and tells Ahmad:
“I drop my ownership of this land.”
That statement alone does not automatically:
- make Ahmad the owner, or
- make the land ownerless.
Ali remains the legal owner until there is a lawful transfer.
So:
Ali owns land
↓
Ahmad wrongfully takes it
↓
Ali says “I drop ownership”
↓
ownership does not automatically disappear
↓
Ali remains owner
9. How Can Ownership Move to Another Person?
Although ownership cannot simply disappear, it can be transferred through lawful means.
Examples include:
- sale,
- gift,
- inheritance,
- other legally recognized methods.
Example: Sale
Ali owns a car.
↓
Ali sells it to Ahmad.
↓
Ahmad becomes the new owner.
So:
Ali → Sale → Ahmad
The ownership moves from one person to another.
10. Inheritance
Inheritance means that when a person dies, his property passes to his lawful heirs according to Islamic inheritance rules.
Example
Yusuf owns a house.
Yusuf dies.
The house does not simply become ownerless.
Instead:
Yusuf dies
↓
property passes to lawful heirs
↓
new ownership continues
11. The Total Owner Can Deal With the Property and Its Usufruct
A total owner owns:
the physical property
and
its usufruct
Therefore, he may deal with:
both together
or
the usufruct alone
This is an important distinction.
12. Transferring Both the Property and Usufruct
A sale is a clear example.
Example
Ali owns a house.
He sells the house to Ahmad.
The ownership of the house passes to Ahmad together with the normal right to benefit from it.
So:
Property + Usufruct
↓
transferred together
↓
Sale
13. Transferring Only the Usufruct
The owner may keep ownership of the physical property but allow another person to receive its benefit.
This happens in transactions such as:
- leasing,
- some forms of lending.
Example
Ali owns a house.
He rents it to Ahmad for one year.
During that year:
Ali owns the house
while
Ahmad has the right to use the house
Ali has not sold the house.
He has only transferred its usufruct for the agreed period.
So:
House remains with Ali
↓
Benefit temporarily goes to Ahmad
14. Sale and Lease Are Different
In a sale, ownership of the actual property normally passes to the buyer.
Example
Ali sells his car to Ahmad.
Ahmad becomes the owner.
In a lease, ownership of the property stays with the owner, while the other person receives the right to use it for a period.
Example
Ali rents his car to Ahmad for one week.
Ali remains the owner.
Ahmad receives the right to use the car for that week.
So remember:
Sale transfers the property.
Lease transfers the benefit for a period.
15. What If the Owner Destroys His Own Property?
The source explains that if a person destroys his own property, he normally does not have to pay compensation to himself.
Why?
Because:
A person cannot compensate himself for his own property.
Example
Ali owns a table.
He deliberately destroys it.
There is no other owner to whom Ali must pay compensation.
So:
Ali destroys Ali’s own property
↓
no compensation is paid to himself
16. Does This Mean Destroying Your Own Property Is Allowed?
No.
This is very important.
A person may not owe financial compensation to another person, but destroying useful property without a valid reason may still be:
- wasteful,
- religiously blameworthy,
- prohibited.
Example
A person owns valuable food and burns it for no reason.
He may not owe compensation to another owner.
But the action may still be wrong because Islam does not approve of wasteful destruction.
So remember:
No financial compensation does not mean the action is religiously acceptable.
17. Mental Incompetence and Legal Restriction
The source also explains that if a person’s behaviour shows serious mental incompetence, his ability to manage property may be legally restricted.
Mental Incompetence
This means that a person does not have enough judgment to manage his financial affairs properly.
Interdiction — Hajr
Hajr means a legal restriction placed on a person’s ability to make certain financial decisions.
The purpose is to protect:
- the person,
- his property,
- and sometimes other people’s rights.
Example
A person repeatedly destroys valuable property and clearly cannot manage his wealth properly.
If there is sufficient legal proof:
legal authority
↓
may restrict some of his financial dealings
↓
to protect his property
18. Ownership and Ability to Manage Are Not the Same
This connects with the earlier topic on ownership.
A person may still be:
the legal owner
even though:
his ability to personally manage the property is restricted
Example
A mentally incompetent person owns a house.
He remains the owner of the house.
However, someone legally authorized may manage the house on his behalf.
Therefore:
Being the owner and being able to personally manage property are two different things.
19. Partial Ownership
The second main type of ownership is:
Partial Ownership
Partial ownership exists when a person owns:
the property without its usufruct
OR
the usufruct without owning the property
So:
Property only
OR
Usufruct only
=
Partial Ownership
20. Why Is It Called Partial Ownership?
It is called partial because the two main parts of total ownership are separated.
Remember:
Total ownership
=
Property + Usufruct
But:
Partial ownership
=
Only one of them
21. Example: Ownership of the Property Without Its Current Usufruct
Ali owns a house.
He leases it to Ahmad for two years.
During those two years:
Ali owns the physical house
while
Ahmad holds the agreed right to use and benefit from the house
The two parts are temporarily separated.
So:
Ali → property
Ahmad → usufruct
22. Example: Ownership of Usufruct Without Owning the Property
Ahmad rents Ali’s house.
Ahmad does not own the actual house.
But he owns or holds the legally recognized right to use the house for the agreed rental period.
So:
Physical house → Ali
Usufruct → Ahmad
This is a form of:
partial ownership relating to usufruct.
23. Usufruct Can Take Different Forms
The source explains that usufruct may be:
1. Personal
This means the right is connected to a particular person.
OR
2. Connected to Property
This means the right is attached to certain land or real estate rather than only to one person.
24. Personal Usufruct
A personal usufruct is a right to use or benefit from property that belongs specifically to a certain individual.
Example
A legal arrangement states:
“Ahmad may live in this house for the rest of his life.”
Ahmad may not own the house itself.
But he has a personal right to live there during his lifetime.
So:
House ownership → another person
Lifetime usufruct → Ahmad
This is a form of partial ownership.
25. Why Is It Called Personal?
It is called personal because the right is connected specifically to that person.
Example
Ahmad has the right to live in a house for life.
As long as Ahmad is alive:
the right continues
When Ahmad dies:
the personal right may end
The exact legal result depends on how the right was created.
26. Property-Based Rights
Sometimes the benefit is connected to a piece of land rather than only to a particular person.
One important example is an:
Easement
An easement is a legal right that allows one piece of land to benefit from another piece of land in a certain way.
Examples include:
- right of way,
- access to water,
- drainage,
- passage through neighboring land.
Easements are mainly connected with:
land and real estate.
27. Example of an Easement
Suppose there are two farms.
Ali owns Farm A.
Ahmad owns Farm B.
Farm B has no direct access to the public road.
There is a legally recognized path through Farm A that allows the owner of Farm B to reach the road.
This is called:
a right of way
which is a type of:
easement
So:
Farm B
↓
has a legal right
↓
to cross part of Farm A
↓
to reach the road
28. Easement Is Attached to the Property
A major difference between an easement and a personal usufruct is that an easement may continue even when the owner of the land changes.
Example
Ahmad owns Farm B.
Farm B has a legal right of way through Farm A.
Ahmad later sells Farm B to Yusuf.
If the right of way is legally attached to Farm B:
Yusuf may receive the same right of way
Why?
Because the right is connected to:
the land
rather than only to:
Ahmad personally
So:
Farm B has right of way
↓
Farm B is sold
↓
right may continue with Farm B
↓
new owner benefits
29. Personal Usufruct and Easement Are Different
A personal usufruct is mainly connected to a specific person.
Example
Ahmad has the right to live in a house for the rest of his life.
An easement is mainly connected to a specific piece of land.
Example
Farm B has a permanent right of way through Farm A.
So the simplest way to remember is:
Personal usufruct follows the person.
Easement follows the land.
30. Full Flow of Total Ownership
Start with:
Person legally acquires property
↓
owns physical property
- ●
owns its usufruct
↓
may use, sell, gift, lease, lend, make waqf, etc.
↓
ownership continues until legally transferred or the property ends
↓
TOTAL OWNERSHIP
31. Full Flow of Partial Ownership
Start with:
Property and usufruct become separated
↓
One person may own:
the physical asset
while another person may hold:
the usufruct
↓
PARTIAL OWNERSHIP
32. One Complete Example
Suppose Maryam owns a house.
Stage 1 — Maryam Lives in the House
Maryam owns:
the house + its usufruct
Therefore:
Total Ownership
Stage 2 — Maryam Leases It to Sarah
Maryam keeps:
ownership of the house
Sarah receives:
the usufruct for two years
The ownership elements are now separated.
Therefore:
Partial Ownership Interests
Stage 3 — The Lease Ends
Sarah’s usufruct ends.
Maryam again personally has:
the house + its present usufruct
Therefore:
Total Ownership
33. Example of Lifetime Usufruct
Suppose Yusuf owns a house.
Ali has been legally given the right to live in that house for the rest of his life.
Yusuf
owns:
the physical house
Ali
holds:
the lifetime usufruct
So:
Yusuf → property
Ali → usufruct
This is an example of partial ownership.
34. Example of an Easement
Ali owns Land A.
Ahmad owns Land B.
Land B has a legal right to use a path through Land A.
So:
Ali owns Land A
while
Land B benefits from the right of way
If Land B is sold, the easement may continue with the property according to the legal terms.
35. Direct Questions and Answers
Question 1: What is total ownership?
Answer:
Total ownership means owning:
the property itself + its usufruct
at the same time.
Question 2: Does total ownership normally have a fixed time limit?
Answer: No.
It normally continues while the property exists unless ownership is lawfully transferred.
Question 3: Can a person simply make property ownerless by saying, “I drop my ownership”?
Answer:
According to the rule explained in this section, no.
A simple statement does not automatically make the property ownerless.
Question 4: How can ownership pass to another person?
Answer:
Through lawful methods such as:
- sale,
- gift,
- inheritance,
- other recognized legal transfers.
Question 5: What can a total owner do?
Answer:
Subject to Islamic Law, the owner may:
- use the property,
- benefit from it,
- invest in it,
- sell it,
- gift it,
- lease it,
- lend it,
- include it in a will,
- dedicate it as waqf.
Question 6: Can the owner transfer only the usufruct?
Answer: Yes.
For example:
Lease → usufruct is transferred temporarily
while:
physical ownership remains with the owner.
Question 7: What is partial ownership?
Answer:
Partial ownership means owning:
the property without its usufruct
OR
the usufruct without owning the property.
Question 8: Can usufruct itself be owned?
Answer: Yes.
A person can have a legally recognized right over the benefit of property without owning the physical asset.
Example
Landlord → owns the house
Tenant → holds the usufruct
Question 9: What is personal usufruct?
Answer:
A right to use or benefit from property that is attached to a particular person.
Example
A person’s right to live in a house for the rest of his life.
Question 10: What is an easement?
Answer:
An easement is a legal right attached to land that allows one property to benefit from another property.
Example
A right of way across neighboring land.
Question 11: If an owner destroys his own property, must he pay himself compensation?
Answer: No.
A person does not pay compensation to himself.
However, deliberately destroying or wasting useful property may still be religiously prohibited.
Question 12: What is hajr?
Answer:
Hajr, or legal interdiction, means restricting a person’s ability to make certain financial decisions because he lacks sufficient ability or judgment to manage his property properly.
36. Most Important Ideas to Memorize
Total Ownership
Property + Usufruct
The same person owns both.
Partial Ownership
Property only
OR
Usufruct only
The two elements are separated.
Usufruct
The right to use or benefit from property.
Personal Usufruct
A right attached to a specific person.
Example:
right to live in a house for life
Easement
A right attached to land.
Example:
right of way
Hajr
A legal restriction on a person’s ability to manage property because of insufficient legal or mental capacity.
37. Final Memory Flow
TYPES OF OWNERSHIP
↓
TOTAL OWNERSHIP
Physical property
- ●
Usufruct
↓
One person owns both
Example:
Ali owns and uses his own house
PARTIAL OWNERSHIP
Either:
Physical property only
OR
Usufruct only
↓
Example:
Landlord owns the house
Tenant holds the usufruct
Usufruct may then be:
Personal
Example:
right to live in a house for life
OR
Attached to Property
Example:
right of way over neighboring land
38. One-Sentence Rule to Memorize
Total ownership means owning both the physical property and its usufruct, while partial ownership exists when these two elements are separated so that a person owns only the property or only the right to benefit from it.
A very easy exam shortcut is: “Total = asset + benefit; Partial = only one of them.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 246: Dishonestly Making False Claim in Court
Introduction
Section 246 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes a person who makes a claim in Court which he knows to be false, where the claim is made:
Fraudulently; or
Dishonestly; or
With intent to injure another person; or
With intent to annoy another person.
The section is therefore directed against the deliberate misuse of judicial proceedings through knowingly false claims.
Its essential focus is not merely that a claim ultimately fails. The accused must know that the claim is false, and must make it with one of the specified wrongful mental states.
Basic Formula
CLAIM IN COURT + KNOWLEDGE THAT CLAIM IS FALSE + FRAUDULENTLY / DISHONESTLY / INTENT TO INJURE OR ANNOY = SECTION 246
Q1. What does Section 246 provide?
Answer:
Section 246 applies where a person:
Makes a claim;
Makes that claim in a Court;
Knows that the claim is false; and
Makes it:
Fraudulently; or
Dishonestly; or
With intent to injure any person; or
With intent to annoy any person.
Q2. What is the object of Section 246?
Answer:
The object is to protect the judicial process from persons who knowingly place false claims before a Court for improper purposes.
It seeks to prevent:
Fraudulent litigation;
Dishonest claims;
Deliberate harassment through Court proceedings;
False claims intended to injure another person;
False claims intended merely to annoy another person.
Core Principle
A person cannot knowingly use a false Court claim as an instrument of fraud, dishonesty, injury, or harassment.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 246 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 246 BNS = Section 209 IPC
Q4. Has Section 246 changed under BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the substantive language remains unchanged.
The principal drafting change is:
“Court of Justice” → “Court”
Q5. Who can commit the offence under Section 246?
Answer:
The section begins with:
“Whoever”
Therefore, it is a general offence.
No special official or professional status is required.
Q6. What are the essential ingredients of Section 246?
Answer:
The main ingredients are:
The accused makes a claim;
The claim is made in a Court;
The accused knows the claim is false;
The accused makes the false claim:
Fraudulently; or
Dishonestly; or
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy.
Formula
COURT + FALSE CLAIM + KNOWLEDGE + WRONGFUL MENTAL STATE = 246
Q7. Is every unsuccessful claim punishable under Section 246?
Answer:
No.
A claim may fail for many innocent reasons, such as:
Insufficient evidence;
Mistaken interpretation of law;
Genuine factual dispute;
Failure to prove entitlement.
Section 246 requires something more:
Knowledge that the claim is false
plus one of the specified wrongful purposes or mental states.
Q8. Is every incorrect claim punishable?
Answer:
No.
The claim must be one which the person:
Knows to be false
An honestly mistaken claim does not automatically satisfy the section.
Q9. What is the central knowledge requirement?
Answer:
The accused must know:
The claim is false
This is one of the most important ingredients.
Q10. Is negligence sufficient?
Answer:
No.
Negligently making an inaccurate claim is not the same as knowingly making a false claim.
Q11. Is recklessness expressly enough?
Answer:
The supplied wording specifically requires that the person:
“knows to be false”
Therefore, the statutory focus is knowledge.
Q12. Must the entire claim be false?
Answer:
The section refers to:
“any claim which he knows to be false”
The precise factual question would be whether the claim placed before the Court is knowingly false.
A claim should not be treated as criminal merely because one disputed component is later rejected unless the statutory requirements are established.
Q13. Must the claim be made in a Court?
Answer:
Yes.
The provision expressly requires that the false claim be made:
“in a Court”
This is a central ingredient.
Q14. Would a false private demand outside Court automatically fall within Section 246?
Answer:
No.
Section 246 specifically concerns a false claim made in Court.
A false demand made only privately would have to be considered under any other applicable provision, not Section 246 merely on that basis.
Q15. What does “claim” mean for study purposes?
Answer:
In this context, a claim refers to an assertion before the Court seeking some legal recognition, remedy, right, money, property, relief, or other judicial determination.
Q16. Must the claim concern money?
Answer:
No.
The section does not restrict itself to monetary claims.
It refers broadly to:
“any claim”
Q17. Can a claim relating to property be covered?
Answer:
Yes.
If a person knowingly advances a false property claim in Court with the required mental state, Section 246 may apply.
Q18. Can a claim relating to some other legal right be covered?
Answer:
Potentially yes.
The language is broad enough to cover a knowingly false claim made before a Court, subject to all statutory ingredients.
Q19. What are the four wrongful mental states mentioned in Section 246?
Answer:
The section uses four alternatives:
Fraudulently
Dishonestly
Intent to injure
Intent to annoy
Memory
F – D – I – A
FRAUD – DISHONESTY – INJURY – ANNOYANCE
Q20. Must all four mental states be proved?
Answer:
No.
The wording is alternative.
It is sufficient if the false claim is made:
Fraudulently; or
Dishonestly; or
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy.
Q21. What does “fraudulently” add to the section?
Answer:
It covers a knowingly false claim made as part of a fraudulent purpose or design.
The claim is not simply legally mistaken; it is deliberately used to obtain an improper advantage or produce a deceptive result.
Q22. What does “dishonestly” add?
Answer:
It brings within the section knowingly false claims made with dishonest purpose.
Again, the key distinction is between genuine litigation and deliberate misuse of Court process.
Q23. What is meant by intent to injure?
Answer:
The person may knowingly make the false claim specifically to cause injury to another person.
The section does not require that fraud or dishonesty be separately proved if the intent to injure branch is established.
Q24. What is meant by intent to annoy?
Answer:
The section expressly extends to a knowingly false claim made merely to annoy another person.
This shows that the provision protects against vexatious misuse of Court process even where the objective is harassment rather than financial gain.
Q25. Is financial gain necessary?
Answer:
No.
The intent to injure and intent to annoy branches show that the offence does not depend upon obtaining money or property.
Q26. Must actual injury occur?
Answer:
The statutory wording requires:
Intent to injure
It does not expressly require that the intended injury actually occur.
Q27. Must actual annoyance be proved?
Answer:
The section refers to:
Intent to annoy
Therefore, the focus is the intention behind making the knowingly false claim.
Q28. Can a person be liable even if the Court rejects the claim immediately?
Answer:
Yes, potentially.
The offence concerns the making of the knowingly false claim with the specified mental state.
Successful deception of the Court is not made an express ingredient.
Q29. Must the accused obtain a decree or order?
Answer:
No.
Section 246 concerns making the false claim itself.
This is an important distinction from Section 247, which deals with fraudulently obtaining or executing a decree or order.
Q30. Is success of the false claim necessary?
Answer:
No.
The provision does not require the accused to win the case.
Q31. Give a simple example of a dishonest false claim.
Answer:
Suppose A knows B owes him nothing.
A nevertheless files a Court claim seeking ₹5 lakh from B, knowing the claim is completely false and intending to obtain money dishonestly.
Section 246 may apply.
Q32. Give an example involving property.
Answer:
Suppose A knows he has no legal interest in B's land but knowingly files a false claim asserting ownership in order to obtain the property.
Section 246 may apply if the other ingredients are proved.
Q33. Give an example involving intent to injure.
Answer:
Suppose A knows he has no genuine claim against B but files a false Court case solely to damage B financially or legally.
The intent-to-injure branch may become relevant.
Q34. Give an example involving intent to annoy.
Answer:
Suppose A repeatedly initiates a knowingly false Court claim against B solely to harass and inconvenience B.
The intent-to-annoy branch may become relevant.
Q35. Give an example where Section 246 may not apply.
Answer:
Suppose A genuinely believes he has a valid claim against B based on a disputed contract.
The Court ultimately rejects A's interpretation.
The fact that A loses does not by itself prove that A knew the claim was false.
Q36. What if the claimant honestly misunderstands the law?
Answer:
An honest legal mistake is different from knowingly making a false claim.
The prosecution must establish the required knowledge and wrongful mental state.
Q37. What if two parties genuinely dispute the amount payable?
Answer:
A genuine dispute over valuation or amount does not automatically attract Section 246.
The key question remains:
Did the claimant know the claim was false?
Q38. Can a claim be exaggerated and still attract Section 246?
Answer:
If the person knowingly advances a false claim and does so fraudulently, dishonestly, or with intent to injure or annoy, the section may be relevant.
However, liability must be determined by the actual statutory ingredients rather than merely by the Court reducing the amount claimed.
Q39. Does Section 246 require a false criminal charge?
Answer:
No.
That is the subject of Section 248.
Section 246 concerns:
A false claim in Court
Section 248 concerns:
A false criminal proceeding or criminal charge
Q40. How does Section 246 differ from Section 247?
Answer:
This is an important distinction.
Section 246
Punishes knowingly making a false claim in Court.
Focus
FALSE CLAIM
Section 247
Punishes fraudulently:
Obtaining a decree or order for something not due;
Obtaining more than is due;
Obtaining property or an interest not due;
Executing a satisfied decree/order;
Permitting such conduct in one's name.
Focus
FALSE/EXCESSIVE DECREE OR FRAUDULENT EXECUTION
Memory
246 = CLAIM
247 = DECREE / EXECUTION
Q41. Must Section 246 necessarily occur before Section 247?
Answer:
Conceptually, a false claim may precede a fraudulent decree, but the two sections create distinct offences with different statutory ingredients.
Do not automatically assume that proof of one establishes the other.
Q42. What is the central mens rea difference between Sections 246 and 247?
Answer:
Section 246
The false claim must be made:
Fraudulently;
Dishonestly;
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy,
and the person must know the claim is false.
Section 247
The operative requirement is that the prohibited conduct is done:
Fraudulently
Memory
246 = KNOWINGLY FALSE + F/D/INJURE/ANNOY
247 = FRAUDULENT DECREE/EXECUTION
Q43. How does Section 246 differ from Section 248?
Answer:
Section 246
Knowingly false claim in Court.
Section 248
Criminal proceeding or false accusation of an offence, made with intent to injure and knowing there is no just or lawful ground.
Memory
246 = FALSE COURT CLAIM
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Q44. What is the punishment under Section 246?
Answer:
The punishment is:
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years; and
The offender shall also be liable to fine.
Q45. Is fine merely an alternative to imprisonment?
Answer:
No.
The wording provides:
“and shall also be liable to fine”
Thus, the section contemplates imprisonment together with liability to fine.
Q46. What is the maximum imprisonment?
Answer:
2 years
Q47. What does “imprisonment of either description” mean?
Answer:
It means:
Simple imprisonment; or
Rigorous imprisonment.
Q48. Is a specific maximum fine stated?
Answer:
No.
The supplied text does not specify a fixed monetary ceiling.
Q49. What is the classification of Section 246?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
Non-cognizable
Bailable
Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
NC + B + MFC
Q50. Is Section 246 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
It is:
Non-cognizable
Q51. Is Section 246 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
It is:
Bailable
Q52. Which Court may try Section 246?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
Magistrate of the First Class
Q53. What is the easiest examination test for Section 246?
Answer:
Ask:
Was a claim made?
Was it made in Court?
Did the claimant know it was false?
Was it made:
Fraudulently;
Dishonestly;
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy?
If yes, Section 246 may apply.
Q54. What are the two things that must never be forgotten?
Answer:
KNOWINGLY FALSE
and
WRONGFUL PURPOSE
A false claim without knowledge, or a failed claim without wrongful purpose, is not enough.
Q55. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“KNOWINGLY FALSE COURT CLAIM + FRAUD/DISHONESTY/INJURY/ANNOYANCE = 246.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Place
The claim must be made:
IN A COURT
2. Act
The accused:
MAKES A CLAIM
3. Knowledge
The accused:
KNOWS THE CLAIM TO BE FALSE
This separates criminal liability from genuine mistaken litigation.
4. Alternative Mental States
The claim must be made:
Fraudulently; or
Dishonestly; or
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy.
Memory
F – D – I – A
Best Structural Formula
COURT
+
CLAIM
+
KNOWINGLY FALSE
+
FRAUD / DISHONESTY / INJURY / ANNOYANCE
= SECTION 246
Punishment Study Notes
Section 246 provides:
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years;
Liability to fine.
Memory
246 = 2 YEARS + FINE LIABILITY
Classification Study Notes
Section 246 is:
Non-cognizable
Bailable
Triable by Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
NC + B + MFC
IPC Equivalent and BNS Change
According to the supplied comments:
Section 246 BNS = Section 209 IPC
The substantive language remains unchanged.
The drafting change is:
“COURT OF JUSTICE” → “COURT”
Difference Between Sections 246, 247 and 248
Section 246 — False Claim
A person knowingly makes a false claim in Court with a specified wrongful mental state.
Memory
CLAIM
Section 247 — False Decree / Execution
A person fraudulently:
Obtains decree/order for something not due; or
Executes it after satisfaction.
Memory
DECREE
Section 248 — False Criminal Charge
A person:
Institutes or causes criminal proceeding; or
Falsely charges another with an offence;
with intent to injure and knowing there is no just or lawful ground.
Memory
CRIMINAL CHARGE
Three-Section Memory
246 = FALSE CLAIM
247 = FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Quick Revision Notes
Section
246 BNS
Title
Dishonestly making false claim in Court
IPC Equivalent
209 IPC
Act
Making a claim in Court.
Knowledge
Claimant knows claim is false.
Required Mental State
Any one of:
Fraudulently;
Dishonestly;
Intent to injure;
Intent to annoy.
Punishment
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years + liable to fine
Classification
Non-cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate First Class
BNS Change
“Court of Justice” → “Court”
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every rejected Court claim is criminal
Incorrect.
The claimant must:
KNOW THE CLAIM IS FALSE
Trap 2 — Forgetting the claim must be made in Court
A false demand made only outside Court does not satisfy this section merely by being false.
Trap 3 — Requiring both fraud and dishonesty
Incorrect.
The mental states are alternatives.
Trap 4 — Forgetting intent to annoy
Even where financial gain is absent, knowingly false litigation intended to annoy may be covered.
Trap 5 — Forgetting intent to injure
The provision expressly includes injury as a prohibited purpose.
Trap 6 — Assuming actual injury is necessary
The wording focuses on:
Intent to injure
Trap 7 — Assuming success of the false claim is necessary
Incorrect.
The offence is concerned with making the knowingly false claim.
Trap 8 — Confusing Section 246 with Section 247
Remember:
246 = CLAIM
247 = DECREE / EXECUTION
Trap 9 — Confusing Section 246 with Section 248
Remember:
246 = FALSE CLAIM IN COURT
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Trap 10 — Forgetting the BNS drafting change
The BNS uses:
“COURT”
instead of:
“Court of Justice.”
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 246–254
246
Knowingly false claim in Court made fraudulently, dishonestly, or to injure/annoy.
Memory
FALSE CLAIM
247
Fraudulently obtain or execute decree/order for something not due.
Memory
FALSE DECREE
248
Knowingly false criminal proceeding or charge with intent to injure.
Memory
FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
249
Harbour or conceal offender after crime to screen from punishment.
Memory
HIDE OFFENDER
250
Accept or seek benefit to conceal, screen, or not proceed.
Memory
TAKE TO SCREEN
251
Give or offer benefit to obtain concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
GIVE TO SCREEN
252
Take gratification to recover movable property but fail to pursue offender.
Memory
TAKE TO RECOVER
253
Harbour or conceal escapee/wanted person to prevent apprehension.
Memory
HIDE WANTED PERSON
254
Harbour robbers or dacoits to facilitate or screen.
Memory
HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Best Nine-Section Memory Sequence
246 = FALSE CLAIM
247 = FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CHARGE
249 = HIDE OFFENDER
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
252 = TAKE TO RECOVER
253 = HIDE ESCAPEE
254 = HARBOUR ROBBERS
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 246
MAKE CLAIM IN COURT
+
KNOW CLAIM IS FALSE
+
ANY ONE OF:
FRAUDULENTLY
DISHONESTLY
INTENT TO INJURE
INTENT TO ANNOY
= SECTION 246
Shortest Memory Rule
“KNOWINGLY MAKE A FALSE COURT CLAIM FOR A WRONGFUL PURPOSE = 246.”
Key Takeaway
Section 246 BNS punishes deliberate misuse of the Court through a knowingly false claim.
The prosecution must establish:
A claim was made in Court;
The accused knew that claim was false; and
The claim was made:
Fraudulently;
Dishonestly;
With intent to injure; or
With intent to annoy.
The punishment is:
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years + liability to fine
The offence is:
Non-cognizable + Bailable + Triable by Magistrate of the First Class
According to the supplied comments:
Section 246 BNS = Section 209 IPC
and the only stated drafting change is:
“Court of Justice” → “Court”
Final Memory Line
“246 = COURT + KNOWINGLY FALSE CLAIM + FRAUD/DISHONESTY/INJURY/ANNOYANCE.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 247: Fraudulently Obtaining Decree for Sum Not Due
Introduction
Section 247 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes fraudulent misuse of a decree or order of a Court.
The provision covers not only obtaining a decree or order for money or property to which a person is not entitled, but also fraudulently executing a decree or order after it has already been satisfied. It further extends liability to a person who fraudulently allows such misuse to occur in his name.
The essence of the section is:
Fraudulent use of judicial decree or order to obtain more than what is legally due.
Q1. What does Section 247 provide?
Answer:
Section 247 punishes a person who fraudulently:
1. Obtains a decree or order against another person:
o For a sum not due;
o For a larger sum than is due;
o For property to which he is not entitled; or
o For an interest in property to which he is not entitled;
2. Causes a decree or order to be executed:
o After it has already been satisfied; or
o For something in respect of which it has already been satisfied;
3. Suffers or permits any such act to be done in his name.
Q2. What is the object of Section 247?
Answer:
The object is to protect the integrity of judicial decrees and orders from fraudulent misuse.
A decree or order of Court must not be used:
- To recover money that is not due;
- To recover more money than is due;
- To obtain property or an interest in property without entitlement;
- To enforce a claim after it has already been satisfied.
Core Principle
A Court decree cannot be fraudulently obtained or reused as an instrument of unjust enrichment.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 247 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 247 BNS = Section 210 IPC
Q4. Has Section 247 changed under BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The language remains unchanged; and
- The provision has been retained as it is.
Therefore, no substantive BNS change has been identified in the supplied material.
Q5. Who can commit the offence under Section 247?
Answer:
The provision begins with:
“Whoever”
Therefore, it is a general offence and can be committed by any person who satisfies the statutory ingredients.
Q6. What is the central mental element under Section 247?
Answer:
The section repeatedly uses the word:
“fraudulently”
Therefore, fraudulent conduct is essential.
A mere mistake, miscalculation, or bona fide legal dispute is not enough.
Q7. What are the main branches of Section 247?
Answer:
The section can be divided into three broad branches:
1. Fraudulently obtaining an excessive or unjustified decree/order;
2. Fraudulently executing a decree/order after satisfaction;
3. Fraudulently allowing such misuse in one's own name.
Memory
OBTAIN – EXECUTE – PERMIT
Q8. What is the first mode of offence?
Answer:
The first mode is fraudulently obtaining a decree or order:
For a sum not due
This means there is no lawful monetary liability for that sum.
Q9. Give an example of a “sum not due.”
Answer:
Suppose A knows that B owes him nothing, but A fraudulently obtains a decree directing B to pay ₹1,00,000.
Section 247 may apply.
Q10. What is the second monetary mode?
Answer:
The section also covers fraudulently obtaining a decree or order:
For a larger sum than is due
Here, some amount may genuinely be payable, but the person fraudulently obtains a decree for more than the lawful amount.
Q11. Give an example of a larger sum than due.
Answer:
Suppose B genuinely owes A ₹50,000.
A fraudulently obtains a decree for ₹1,50,000 while knowing only ₹50,000 is due.
The excess component brings the conduct within the statutory wording.
Q12. Must the entire claim be false?
Answer:
No.
The section expressly covers a case where:
- Some amount is due;
- But a larger amount is fraudulently claimed through the decree or order.
Q13. Does Section 247 apply only to money claims?
Answer:
No.
The section also applies to:
- Property; or
- An interest in property.
Q14. What is the property-related branch?
Answer:
The section covers fraudulently obtaining a decree or order:
For property or an interest in property to which the person is not entitled
Q15. What does “interest in property” add?
Answer:
It makes the provision broader than outright ownership.
A person may be guilty even if he fraudulently claims:
- A share;
- A legal interest;
- A right in property;
to which he is not entitled.
Q16. Give an example involving property.
Answer:
Suppose A knows that a house belongs entirely to B, but A fraudulently obtains a decree declaring himself entitled to the house.
Section 247 may apply.
Q17. Give an example involving an interest in property.
Answer:
Suppose A knows that he has no share in certain land but fraudulently obtains a decree declaring that he owns a one-half interest in it.
Section 247 may apply.
Q18. What is the second major branch of Section 247?
Answer:
The second branch concerns fraudulent execution of a decree or order:
After it has been satisfied
Q19. What does “satisfied” mean here?
Answer:
It means the obligation under the decree or order has already been fulfilled.
For example:
- The money has been paid;
- The property has been delivered;
- The required obligation has been discharged.
Q20. Why is re-execution after satisfaction punishable?
Answer:
Because once a decree has been satisfied, the decree-holder is no longer entitled to enforce it again for the same obligation.
Fraudulently executing it again amounts to an attempt to obtain a second benefit.
Q21. Give an example of execution after satisfaction.
Answer:
Suppose B pays A the full amount due under a decree.
A knows the decree has been fully satisfied but fraudulently causes execution proceedings to recover the same amount again.
Section 247 may apply.
Q22. Does the section also cover partial satisfaction?
Answer:
Yes.
The wording covers execution:
“for anything in respect of which it has been satisfied”
Therefore, if part of the decree has already been satisfied, the person cannot fraudulently execute it again for that satisfied part.
Q23. Give an example of partial satisfaction.
Answer:
Suppose a decree is for ₹2,00,000.
B has already paid ₹1,00,000.
A fraudulently causes execution for the full ₹2,00,000, ignoring the amount already paid.
The execution concerning the already satisfied ₹1,00,000 may fall within Section 247.
Q24. Must the decree be completely satisfied before Section 247 applies?
Answer:
No.
The section also covers anything:
In respect of which the decree has been satisfied
Thus, partial satisfaction can be sufficient for the relevant portion.
Q25. What does “causes a decree or order to be executed” mean?
Answer:
It means setting or procuring the enforcement process in motion against another person.
The accused need not personally perform every execution step.
Q26. Must actual recovery occur through execution?
Answer:
The wording focuses on fraudulently causing the decree or order to be executed.
The section does not expressly require that the accused ultimately succeeds in obtaining the money or property.
Q27. What is the third major branch of Section 247?
Answer:
The section also punishes a person who fraudulently:
Suffers or permits any such act to be done in his name
Q28. Why is this third branch important?
Answer:
It prevents a person from avoiding liability by saying:
- “I did not personally obtain the decree,” or
- “I did not personally execute it.”
If he fraudulently allows another person to carry out the wrongful act in his name, Section 247 may still apply.
Q29. What does “suffers” mean in this context?
Answer:
It means knowingly allows or tolerates the act.
The important point is that the person fraudulently permits the misuse to occur in his name.
Q30. What does “permits” add?
Answer:
It expressly covers authorised or allowed conduct.
The accused may be liable where he knowingly and fraudulently allows another person to use his name for the prohibited act.
Q31. Give an example of permitting the act in one's name.
Answer:
Suppose A knows that a decree in his favour has already been fully satisfied.
A nevertheless allows C to initiate execution in A's name for the same amount.
If A fraudulently permits this, Section 247 may apply.
Q32. Is a civil dispute by itself enough for criminal liability?
Answer:
No.
The key element is:
Fraudulently
A genuine dispute over:
- Amount due;
- Ownership;
- Satisfaction;
- Interpretation of decree;
does not automatically amount to Section 247.
Q33. Is negligence sufficient?
Answer:
No.
Mere carelessness is not the statutory standard.
Fraudulent conduct must be established.
Q34. Is a bona fide mistake about the amount due sufficient?
Answer:
No.
If a person honestly believes that a particular amount is due, the required fraudulent element may be absent.
Q35. What if a person genuinely disputes whether the decree has been satisfied?
Answer:
A genuine dispute would not automatically attract Section 247.
The prosecution must establish fraudulent conduct rather than merely an incorrect position.
Q36. Does Section 247 require a decree specifically?
Answer:
No.
The statutory wording covers:
A decree or order
Thus, both are included.
Q37. Must the decree or order be against another person?
Answer:
Yes.
The first limb refers to obtaining a decree or order:
Against any person
Q38. Does Section 247 apply only to Court judgments for money?
Answer:
No.
It extends to:
- Money;
- Property;
- Interest in property;
- Execution of satisfied decrees or orders.
Q39. Is fraudulent obtaining and fraudulent execution the same thing?
Answer:
No.
They are separate modes.
Fraudulent obtaining
The decree/order itself is improperly obtained for something not due or not entitled.
Fraudulent execution
The decree/order may originally have been valid, but it is fraudulently enforced after satisfaction.
Memory
BAD DECREE vs BAD EXECUTION
Q40. Can a valid decree still be misused under Section 247?
Answer:
Yes.
A decree may have been validly obtained but later fraudulently executed after it has already been satisfied.
Q41. Can an invalid or excessive decree be covered even before execution?
Answer:
Yes.
The first branch concerns fraudulently obtaining the decree or order.
Actual execution is not necessary for that branch.
Q42. What is the punishment under Section 247?
Answer:
The punishment is:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years; or
- Fine; or
- Both.
Q43. What does “imprisonment of either description” mean?
Answer:
It means:
- Simple imprisonment; or
- Rigorous imprisonment.
Q44. What is the maximum imprisonment?
Answer:
2 years
Q45. Is there a specific maximum fine stated?
Answer:
No.
The supplied text provides:
- Fine; or
- Both
without specifying a particular monetary ceiling.
Q46. What is the classification of Section 247?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-cognizable
- Bailable
- Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
NC + B + MFC
Q47. Is Section 247 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
It is:
Non-cognizable
Q48. Is Section 247 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
It is:
Bailable
Q49. Which Court may try the offence?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
Magistrate of the First Class
Q50. Give a complete example of fraudulent excessive decree.
Answer:
Suppose A is genuinely owed ₹20,000 by B.
A deliberately manufactures material to obtain a decree for ₹2,00,000, knowing that only ₹20,000 is due.
If the decree is obtained fraudulently, Section 247 may apply.
Q51. Give a complete example of a decree for property not due.
Answer:
Suppose A knows that he has no legal right to B's land but fraudulently obtains an order declaring that the land belongs to A.
Section 247 may apply.
Q52. Give a complete example of fraudulent re-execution.
Answer:
Suppose a Court orders B to pay A ₹5 lakh.
B pays the entire amount.
A knows payment has been completed but nevertheless fraudulently initiates execution again for the same ₹5 lakh.
Section 247 may apply.
Q53. Give an example where Section 247 may not apply.
Answer:
Suppose A genuinely believes that ₹1 lakh remains unpaid under a decree, but later evidence establishes that the amount had already been paid.
If A acted honestly rather than fraudulently, the essential mens rea may be absent.
Q54. What is the key distinction between fraud and mistake under Section 247?
Answer:
Fraud
The person knowingly manipulates or misuses the decree/order to obtain something he is not entitled to.
Mistake
The person honestly but incorrectly believes the money or property remains due.
Memory
FRAUD = SECTION 247
HONEST ERROR ≠ SECTION 247
Q55. How does Section 247 differ from Section 248?
Answer:
These two sections protect the judicial process in different ways.
Section 247
Concerns fraudulent misuse of:
- Decrees;
- Orders;
- Execution proceedings.
Memory
FALSE/EXCESSIVE DECREE OR EXECUTION
Section 248
Concerns knowingly false:
- Criminal proceedings;
- Criminal accusations,
made with intent to injure.
Memory
FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Simple Contrast
247 = FRAUD IN DECREE/EXECUTION
248 = FRAUDULENTLY FALSE CRIMINAL ACCUSATION
Q56. Is Section 247 limited to criminal proceedings?
Answer:
No.
Unlike Section 248, which specifically concerns criminal proceedings and false criminal charges, Section 247 deals with decrees and orders relating to sums, property, interests in property, and their execution.
Q57. What is the easiest exam test for Section 247?
Answer:
Ask:
1. Was there a decree or order?
2. Was it fraudulently obtained for:
o A sum not due;
o A larger sum than due;
o Property not due;
o An interest in property not due?
3. Alternatively, was a decree/order fraudulently executed after satisfaction?
4. Alternatively, did the accused fraudulently allow such an act in his name?
5. Was the conduct genuinely fraudulent rather than mistaken?
Q58. What are the four main subject matters to remember?
Answer:
The decree or order may concern:
1. Sum not due
2. Larger sum than due
3. Property not entitled to
4. Interest in property not entitled to
Memory
NO SUM – EXCESS SUM – PROPERTY – PROPERTY INTEREST
Q59. What are the three principal action words?
Answer:
OBTAIN
EXECUTE
PERMIT
Q60. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“FRAUDULENT DECREE OR FRAUDULENT RE-EXECUTION = SECTION 247.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Mens Rea
The controlling word is:
FRAUDULENTLY
This distinguishes criminal liability from:
- Honest legal dispute;
- Miscalculation;
- Negligence;
- Genuine misunderstanding.
2. Fraudulent Obtaining Branch
The decree/order may be fraudulently obtained for:
- A sum not due;
- A larger sum than due;
- Property not entitled to;
- Interest in property not entitled to.
3. Fraudulent Execution Branch
The decree/order may be fraudulently executed:
- After full satisfaction; or
- For a part already satisfied.
4. Permitting Branch
A person is also covered if he fraudulently:
- Suffers; or
- Permits
such an act to be done:
IN HIS NAME
Best Structural Memory
WRONG CLAIM
OR
DOUBLE RECOVERY
OR
ALLOW IT IN YOUR NAME
= SECTION 247
Punishment Study Notes
Section 247 provides:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years; or
- Fine; or
- Both.
Memory
247 = 2 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Classification Study Notes
Section 247 is:
- Non-cognizable
- Bailable
- Triable by Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
NC + B + MFC
IPC Equivalent and BNS Position
According to the supplied comments:
Section 247 BNS = Section 210 IPC
The supplied comments state:
- Language unchanged;
- Provision retained as it is.
Quick Revision Notes
Section
247 BNS
Title
Fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due
IPC Equivalent
210 IPC
Core Mens Rea
Fraudulently.
First Branch
Obtain decree/order for:
- Sum not due;
- Larger sum than due;
- Property not entitled to;
- Interest in property not entitled to.
Second Branch
Fraudulently execute decree/order after satisfaction.
Third Branch
Fraudulently suffer or permit such act in one's name.
Punishment
Up to 2 years / fine / both
Classification
Non-cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate First Class
BNS Change
None stated in supplied comments.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking Section 247 applies to every excessive claim
Incorrect.
The conduct must be:
FRAUDULENT
Trap 2 — Thinking the whole sum must be false
Incorrect.
The provision expressly covers:
A LARGER SUM THAN IS DUE
Trap 3 — Restricting the section to money
Incorrect.
It also covers:
- Property;
- Interest in property.
Trap 4 — Forgetting execution after satisfaction
A valid decree can still be fraudulently misused after payment or satisfaction.
Trap 5 — Thinking full satisfaction is always required
Incorrect.
The section also covers execution for:
Anything in respect of which it has been satisfied
Trap 6 — Forgetting liability for permitting conduct in one's own name
The accused need not personally carry out every step.
Trap 7 — Treating an honest accounting mistake as automatically criminal
Incorrect.
Fraudulent intent is central.
Trap 8 — Confusing obtaining with executing
Remember:
OBTAIN = WRONG DECREE/ORDER
EXECUTE = WRONG ENFORCEMENT AFTER SATISFACTION
Trap 9 — Confusing Section 247 with Section 248
Remember:
247 = DECREE / ORDER
248 = FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 247–254
247
Fraudulently obtain or execute decree/order for something not due.
Memory
FALSE DECREE / DOUBLE RECOVERY
248
Knowingly false criminal proceeding or charge with intent to injure.
Memory
FALSE CHARGE
249
Harbour or conceal offender after crime to screen from punishment.
Memory
HIDE OFFENDER
250
Accept or seek benefit to conceal, screen, or not proceed.
Memory
TAKE TO SCREEN
251
Give or offer benefit to obtain concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
GIVE TO SCREEN
252
Take gratification to recover movable property but fail to pursue offender.
Memory
TAKE TO RECOVER
253
Harbour or conceal escapee/wanted person to prevent apprehension.
Memory
HIDE WANTED PERSON
254
Harbour robbers or dacoits to facilitate or screen.
Memory
HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Best Eight-Section Memory Sequence
247 = FALSE DECREE
248 = FALSE CHARGE
249 = HIDE OFFENDER
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
252 = TAKE TO RECOVER
253 = HIDE ESCAPEE
254 = HARBOUR ROBBERS
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 247
FRAUDULENTLY OBTAIN DECREE/ORDER
FOR
- SUM NOT DUE
- EXCESS SUM
- PROPERTY NOT ENTITLED
- PROPERTY INTEREST NOT ENTITLED
OR
FRAUDULENTLY EXECUTE AFTER SATISFACTION
OR
FRAUDULENTLY PERMIT SUCH ACT IN YOUR NAME
= SECTION 247
Shortest Memory Rule
“USE A DECREE FRAUDULENTLY TO CLAIM MORE THAN YOU ARE ENTITLED TO = 247.”
Key Takeaway
Section 247 BNS protects the judicial process against fraudulent use of decrees and orders.
It covers three broad forms of wrongdoing:
1. Fraudulently obtaining a decree or order for:
o Money not due;
o More money than due;
o Property or an interest in property to which the person is not entitled;
2. Fraudulently executing a decree or order after it has already been fully or partly satisfied;
3. Fraudulently allowing such conduct to occur in one's name.
The essential mental element is:
FRAUDULENTLY
The punishment is:
Imprisonment of either description up to 2 years, or fine, or both.
The offence is:
Non-cognizable + Bailable + Triable by Magistrate of the First Class.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 247 BNS = Section 210 IPC
and the provision has been retained without substantive change.
Final Memory Line
“247 = FRAUDULENT DECREE/ORDER + NOT DUE/EXCESS/NO ENTITLEMENT OR RE-EXECUTION AFTER SATISFACTION.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 248: False Charge of Offence Made with Intent to Injure
Introduction
Section 248 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes a person who deliberately sets the criminal process in motion against another person through a false proceeding or false accusation, while:
- Intending to cause injury to that person; and
- Knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for the proceeding or charge.
The section therefore protects individuals from the misuse of criminal law as a weapon of harassment, retaliation, intimidation, or injury.
According to the supplied comments, the provision is closely related in concept to malicious prosecution, although liability under Section 248 must be tested according to its own statutory ingredients.
Basic Formula
INTENT TO INJURE + CRIMINAL PROCEEDING / FALSE CHARGE + KNOWLEDGE OF NO JUST OR LAWFUL GROUND = SECTION 248
Q1. What does Section 248 provide?
Answer:
Section 248 applies where a person, with intent to cause injury to another:
1. Institutes a criminal proceeding against that person; or
2. Causes a criminal proceeding to be instituted against that person; or
3. Falsely charges that person with having committed an offence;
while knowing that there is:
No just or lawful ground
for the proceeding or charge.
Q2. What is the object of Section 248?
Answer:
The object is to prevent abuse of the criminal justice system through knowingly false accusations or proceedings.
It protects persons against:
- Fabricated criminal complaints;
- False criminal accusations;
- Groundless prosecutions;
- Deliberate misuse of police or court processes;
- Criminal proceedings launched to cause injury.
Core Principle
Criminal law cannot be deliberately misused to injure an innocent person through a knowingly groundless charge.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 248 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 248 BNS = Section 211 IPC
Q4. Has Section 248 changed under BNS?
Answer:
Yes.
According to the supplied comments, although the basic language remains substantially the same and the section has been rearranged into clauses, the punishments have been increased.
Clause (a)
The previous maximum imprisonment of 2 years has been increased to:
5 years
The maximum fine has been fixed at:
₹2,00,000
Clause (b)
The previous reference to 7 years has been replaced by:
10 years
and the maximum punishment under the clause has been increased from:
7 years to 10 years
Q5. Who can commit the offence under Section 248?
Answer:
The section begins with:
“Whoever”
Therefore, it is a general offence and may be committed by any person who satisfies the statutory ingredients.
Q6. Can a public servant commit Section 248?
Answer:
Yes.
According to the supplied comments, the section can also apply to a police officer who brings a false criminal charge against a person with the intention of causing injury, provided the statutory requirements are proved.
Q7. What are the essential ingredients of Section 248?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
1. The accused intends to cause injury to another person;
2. The accused:
o Institutes a criminal proceeding;
o Causes a criminal proceeding to be instituted; or
o Falsely charges that person with an offence;
3. The proceeding or charge is against the person intended to be injured;
4. The accused knows that there is no just or lawful ground for:
o The proceeding; or
o The charge;
5. For enhanced punishment under clause (b), the false charge must concern an offence punishable with:
o Death;
o Life imprisonment; or
o Imprisonment for ten years or upwards.
Formula
FALSE CRIMINAL PROCESS + INTENT TO INJURE + KNOWINGLY GROUNDLESS = 248
Q8. What are the two principal forms of prohibited conduct?
Answer:
Section 248 covers:
First Form
Instituting or causing the institution of a criminal proceeding.
Second Form
Falsely charging a person with having committed an offence.
Memory
PROCEEDING OR CHARGE
Q9. What does “institutes” mean in this context?
Answer:
It refers to setting the criminal process in motion against another person.
The supplied comments explain that criminal prosecution may be commenced through various procedural routes.
Q10. What does “causes to be instituted” add to the section?
Answer:
It prevents a person from escaping liability merely because he did not personally file or formally commence the proceeding.
If he causes another person or authority to initiate the false criminal process, the section may still apply.
Memory
DIRECTLY START OR CAUSE TO START
Q11. What does “falsely charges” mean?
Answer:
It refers to falsely accusing a person of having committed an offence.
The charge must be connected to criminal wrongdoing and must be made with the required intention and knowledge.
Q12. Is every incorrect accusation punishable under Section 248?
Answer:
No.
The section requires more than the accusation ultimately proving false.
The prosecution must establish:
- Intent to cause injury; and
- Knowledge that there was no just or lawful ground for the charge or proceeding.
Q13. Is mere failure of the prosecution enough to prove Section 248?
Answer:
No.
The fact that a prosecution fails or ends in acquittal does not by itself establish that the original charge was knowingly groundless.
The accused under Section 248 must have known that no just or lawful ground existed.
Q14. What is the first major mental element?
Answer:
The accused must act:
With intent to cause injury
to the person against whom the criminal process is directed.
Q15. Is intention to injure essential?
Answer:
Yes.
It is expressly stated in the opening words of the section.
Without the required intent to cause injury, the section is not satisfied merely because the allegation later turns out to be incorrect.
Q16. What is the second major mental element?
Answer:
The accused must know:
There is no just or lawful ground
for the proceeding or charge.
Q17. Why is knowledge of absence of lawful ground important?
Answer:
Because the section is aimed at deliberate misuse of criminal proceedings, not genuine complaints made on reasonable grounds that later fail.
Q18. Is negligence enough?
Answer:
No.
The wording requires actual knowledge that no just or lawful ground exists.
Mere carelessness or inadequate investigation is not equivalent to the statutory knowledge requirement.
Q19. Is a genuine but mistaken accusation necessarily punishable?
Answer:
No.
If the person genuinely believes on lawful or reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offence, the requirement that he knows there is no just or lawful ground may be absent.
Q20. What does “just or lawful ground” mean for study purposes?
Answer:
It refers to a legitimate legal or factual basis for commencing the criminal proceeding or making the charge.
Section 248 targets proceedings or charges that the accuser himself knows lack such foundation.
Q21. Must both lack of just ground and lack of lawful ground be separately proved?
Answer:
The statutory phrase is:
“no just or lawful ground”
For examination purposes, the important point is that the accused must know that there is no legitimate basis for the criminal proceeding or accusation.
Q22. Is Section 248 similar to malicious prosecution?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, the provision is very akin to malicious prosecution.
However, for Section 248, the correct approach is to prove the statutory ingredients directly:
- Criminal proceeding or false charge;
- Intent to injure;
- Knowledge of absence of just or lawful ground.
Q23. Must actual injury occur?
Answer:
The section requires:
Intent to cause injury
It does not expressly state that the intended injury must actually materialise before liability can arise.
Q24. Must the false proceeding result in conviction of the victim?
Answer:
No.
Section 248 punishes the false institution or false charge itself when accompanied by the required intention and knowledge.
The falsely accused person need not actually be convicted.
Q25. Must the falsely accused person be arrested?
Answer:
No.
Arrest is not an express ingredient.
The offence centres on the false criminal proceeding or false charge.
Q26. Must the criminal proceeding reach trial?
Answer:
No.
The supplied comments indicate that the section can operate from the stage where the false accusation puts or seeks to put the criminal investigation process into motion.
Q27. What does the supplied commentary say about commencement of criminal prosecution?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, criminal prosecution may be commenced through:
1. A complaint under Section 223 BNSS;
2. A false charge of a cognizable offence made to police;
3. A police report to Court;
4. Moving the Court through a petition under provisions of the BNSS.
Q28. Can a false complaint to police attract Section 248?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, yes, where the false allegation concerns a cognizable offence and is made in a manner that sets or seeks to set the criminal process in motion, provided the other ingredients are proved.
Q29. Can a false police report to Court attract Section 248?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, yes.
A false criminal process need not originate only from a private complaint.
Q30. Can proceedings initiated through a Court petition fall within Section 248?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, yes, where the petition is used to initiate a knowingly groundless criminal proceeding with the required intent to injure.
Q31. What does the commentary mean when it says the false charge must relate to the original accusation?
Answer:
It means the false charge should be the accusation that:
Sets or seeks to set criminal investigation or prosecution in motion
The section is concerned with accusations that initiate or procure the criminal process against another person.
Q32. Must the false charge concern an offence under the BNS itself?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments, the false charge may relate to an offence under:
- A local law; or
- A special law.
It need not necessarily be an offence created by the BNS.
Q33. Why is this important?
Answer:
Because Section 248 protects against knowingly false criminal accusations generally, rather than only false accusations under the BNS.
Q34. What punishment applies under clause (a)?
Answer:
In the ordinary case, the punishment is:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 5 years; or
- Fine up to ₹2,00,000; or
- Both.
Memory
ORDINARY FALSE CHARGE → 5 YEARS / ₹2 LAKH / BOTH
Q35. What does “imprisonment of either description” mean?
Answer:
It means:
- Simple imprisonment; or
- Rigorous imprisonment.
Q36. What is the maximum fine under clause (a)?
Answer:
₹2,00,000
This is an important BNS change highlighted in the supplied comments.
Q37. What punishment applied under the corresponding IPC provision according to the supplied comments?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, clause (a)'s maximum imprisonment was previously:
2 years
Under BNS, it has been increased to:
5 years
Q38. When does clause (b) apply?
Answer:
Clause (b) applies where the false criminal proceeding is instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with:
- Death;
- Imprisonment for life; or
- Imprisonment for ten years or upwards.
Q39. What is the punishment under clause (b)?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 10 years; and
- Shall also be liable to fine.
Memory
SERIOUS FALSE CHARGE → 10 YEARS + FINE
Q40. What is the important BNS change under clause (b)?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The earlier reference to 7 years has been substituted with 10 years;
- The maximum imprisonment has therefore increased from 7 years to 10 years.
Q41. Why does clause (b) impose greater punishment?
Answer:
Because falsely accusing a person of an extremely serious offence exposes that person to far more severe legal consequences.
The section therefore imposes enhanced punishment where the false accusation concerns an offence punishable with:
- Death;
- Life imprisonment; or
- Ten years or more.
Q42. Is fine optional under clause (b)?
Answer:
The wording states that the offender:
“shall also be liable to fine.”
Thus, clause (b) expressly provides liability to fine in addition to imprisonment.
Q43. What is the classification under Section 248(a)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-cognizable
- Bailable
- Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
248(a) = NC + B + MFC
Q44. What is the classification under Section 248(b)?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-cognizable
- Bailable
- Court of Session
Memory
248(b) = NC + B + SESSION
Q45. Is Section 248 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
Both supplied clauses are:
Non-cognizable
Q46. Is Section 248 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
Both clauses are:
Bailable
Q47. What is the main trial-Court difference between clauses (a) and (b)?
Answer:
Clause (a)
Triable by:
Magistrate of the First Class
Clause (b)
Triable by:
Court of Session
This reflects the greater seriousness of falsely accusing a person of an offence carrying death, life imprisonment, or ten years or more.
Q48. Give a simple example of Section 248(a).
Answer:
Suppose A wants to harm B.
A knowingly makes a completely fabricated criminal accusation against B, despite knowing that B committed no such offence and that there is no lawful basis for the accusation.
If the underlying falsely alleged offence does not fall within clause (b), Section 248(a) may apply.
Q49. Give an example of Section 248(b).
Answer:
Suppose A, intending to seriously injure B, knowingly causes a criminal proceeding to be instituted falsely accusing B of an offence punishable with life imprisonment.
A knows there is no just or lawful ground for the accusation.
Section 248(b) may apply.
Q50. Give an example where Section 248 does not apply merely because the complaint failed.
Answer:
Suppose A honestly believes B committed an offence based on facts reasonably available to A.
A makes a complaint, but the evidence later proves insufficient and B is acquitted.
That failure alone does not establish that A knew there was no just or lawful ground when the complaint was made.
Q51. Give an example involving a police officer.
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, suppose a police officer knowingly brings a false criminal charge against a person solely to cause that person injury, while knowing that there is no lawful basis for the charge.
The officer may potentially fall within Section 248 if all statutory ingredients are established.
Q52. Does being a police officer create immunity under Section 248?
Answer:
No such immunity appears in the supplied text.
According to the supplied comments, a police officer can also be liable.
Q53. Can a private complainant commit Section 248?
Answer:
Yes.
A private person who intentionally sets a knowingly false criminal proceeding in motion may fall within the provision.
Q54. Can the section apply where the accusation is under a special statute?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, yes.
The false charge need not be for a BNS offence and may concern an offence under a local or special law.
Q55. Is a false civil claim covered by Section 248?
Answer:
The supplied text specifically concerns:
Criminal proceeding
and a false charge of:
An offence
Therefore, an ordinary false civil claim is not within the wording of Section 248 merely because it is false.
Q56. Is a disciplinary allegation automatically covered?
Answer:
Not merely because it is false.
The section requires a criminal proceeding or a false charge of having committed an offence.
Q57. What is the difference between a false charge and an honest accusation that later proves wrong?
Answer:
The key difference is mens rea.
False charge under Section 248
The accuser:
- Intends to cause injury; and
- Knows there is no just or lawful ground.
Honest but mistaken accusation
The accuser genuinely believes there is a lawful basis.
Memory
FALSE + KNOWINGLY GROUNDLESS = 248
Q58. How does Section 248 differ from Section 249?
Answer:
These neighbouring sections deal with opposite stages of interference with criminal justice.
Section 248
A person falsely sets criminal law against another.
Memory
FALSELY ACCUSE
Section 249
A person harbours or conceals an actual offender to keep criminal law away from him.
Memory
HIDE OFFENDER
Simple Contrast
248 = CREATE FALSE LIABILITY
249 = PREVENT TRUE LIABILITY
Q59. How does Section 248 differ from Sections 250 and 251?
Answer:
Section 248
False accusation or criminal proceeding intended to injure.
Section 250
Taking a benefit in exchange for concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Section 251
Giving a benefit in exchange for concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
248 = FALSE CHARGE
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
Q60. What is the easiest exam test for Section 248?
Answer:
Ask:
1. Was a criminal proceeding instituted or caused to be instituted?
2. Alternatively, was a person falsely charged with an offence?
3. Did the accused intend to cause injury?
4. Did the accused know there was no just or lawful ground?
5. How serious was the falsely alleged offence?
6. Does clause (a) or clause (b) apply?
Q61. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE + INTENT TO INJURE + KNOWING NO LAWFUL BASIS = 248.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. General Offender
The section applies to:
WHOEVER
It can therefore apply to a private individual and, according to the supplied comments, also to a police officer.
2. First Prohibited Act
INSTITUTES CRIMINAL PROCEEDING
3. Second Prohibited Act
CAUSES CRIMINAL PROCEEDING TO BE INSTITUTED
4. Third Prohibited Act
FALSELY CHARGES A PERSON WITH AN OFFENCE
5. First Mens Rea Requirement
INTENT TO CAUSE INJURY
6. Second Mens Rea Requirement
KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE IS NO JUST OR LAWFUL GROUND
Mental Element Formula
INTENT TO INJURE
+
KNOWINGLY GROUNDLESS
These must accompany the false criminal proceeding or accusation.
Punishment Study Notes
Clause (a) — Ordinary Case
Punishment:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 5 years; or
- Fine up to ₹2 lakh; or
- Both.
Memory
5 YEARS / ₹2 LAKH / BOTH
Clause (b) — Serious False Charge
Applies where the falsely alleged offence is punishable with:
- Death;
- Life imprisonment;
- Ten years or upwards.
Punishment:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 10 years;
- Fine also.
Memory
DEATH / LIFE / 10+ → 10 YEARS + FINE
BNS Changes Study Notes
According to the supplied comments:
Clause (a)
Old maximum:
2 years
BNS maximum:
5 years
Fine ceiling fixed at:
₹2 lakh
Clause (b)
Old maximum:
7 years
BNS maximum:
10 years
The provision has also been rearranged into clauses.
Modes of Commencing Criminal Prosecution in the Supplied Commentary
According to the supplied comments, the criminal process may be set in motion through:
1. Complaint
Complaint under Section 223 BNSS.
2. Police Accusation
False charge of a cognizable offence to police.
3. Police Report
A police report to Court.
4. Court Petition
Moving the Court through an appropriate petition under the BNSS.
Revision Point
The method may differ, but the central question remains:
DID THE ACCUSED KNOWINGLY SET A GROUNDLESS CRIMINAL PROCESS IN MOTION TO INJURE ANOTHER?
Scope of the False Charge
According to the supplied comments, the false accusation must relate to the original accusation that:
PUTS OR SEEKS TO PUT THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO MOTION
The underlying falsely alleged offence may arise under:
- BNS;
- Local law;
- Special law.
Difference Between Section 248(a) and Section 248(b)
Section 248(a)
Ordinary false criminal proceeding or false accusation satisfying the section.
Punishment:
Up to 5 years / ₹2 lakh fine / both
Classification:
NC + B + MFC
Section 248(b)
False proceeding involving an accusation of an offence punishable with:
- Death;
- Life imprisonment;
- Ten years or upwards.
Punishment:
Up to 10 years + fine
Classification:
NC + B + Court of Session
Quick Revision Notes
Section
248 BNS
Title
False charge of offence made with intent to injure
IPC Equivalent
211 IPC
Act
- Institute criminal proceeding;
- Cause criminal proceeding to be instituted;
- Falsely charge another with an offence.
First Mens Rea
Intent to cause injury.
Second Mens Rea
Knowledge that there is no just or lawful ground.
Clause (a) Punishment
Up to 5 years / fine up to ₹2 lakh / both
Clause (b) Trigger
False charge of offence punishable with:
Death / life / 10 years or upwards
Clause (b) Punishment
Up to 10 years + fine
Classification
248(a): NC + B + MFC
248(b): NC + B + Court of Session
BNS Changes
- 2 years → 5 years
- Fine ceiling → ₹2 lakh
- 7 years → 10 years
- Provision rearranged into clauses.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Thinking every failed prosecution is a false charge
Incorrect.
The accuser must know there is:
NO JUST OR LAWFUL GROUND
Trap 2 — Forgetting intent to injure
A false allegation alone does not complete the statutory test.
Remember:
INTENT TO CAUSE INJURY
Trap 3 — Requiring actual conviction of the falsely accused person
Incorrect.
Section 248 is directed at the false charge or proceeding itself.
Trap 4 — Requiring actual arrest
Incorrect.
Arrest is not an express ingredient.
Trap 5 — Restricting the section to complaints filed directly in Court
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments, the criminal process may also be set in motion through police and other BNSS mechanisms.
Trap 6 — Assuming only private persons can commit it
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments, a police officer may also fall within the section.
Trap 7 — Assuming the false charge must be under BNS
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments, it may concern an offence under a local or special law.
Trap 8 — Forgetting the enhanced punishment
For a falsely alleged offence punishable with:
DEATH / LIFE / 10 YEARS OR MORE
the punishment may extend to:
10 YEARS + FINE
Trap 9 — Writing the old IPC punishment
For clause (a), the BNS maximum is:
5 YEARS
not 2 years.
Trap 10 — Writing ₹2 lakh as the clause (b) fine ceiling
The supplied text fixes the ₹2 lakh ceiling under clause (a).
Clause (b) simply says the offender shall also be liable to fine.
Trap 11 — Confusing Section 248 with malicious prosecution as if they were identical concepts
The supplied comments say Section 248 is akin to malicious prosecution.
For an exam answer, always return to the statutory ingredients of Section 248 itself.
Trap 12 — Confusing Sections 248 and 249
Remember:
248 = FALSELY PUT CRIMINAL LAW IN MOTION
249 = HIDE PERSON FROM CRIMINAL LAW
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 248–254
248
Knowingly false criminal charge or proceeding with intent to injure.
Memory
FALSE CHARGE
249
Harbour or conceal offender after crime to screen from punishment.
Memory
HIDE OFFENDER
250
Accept or seek a benefit to conceal, screen, or not proceed.
Memory
TAKE TO SCREEN
251
Give or offer a benefit to obtain concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
GIVE TO SCREEN
252
Take gratification to help recover movable property but fail to pursue offender.
Memory
TAKE TO RECOVER
253
Harbour or conceal escapee/wanted person to prevent apprehension.
Memory
HIDE WANTED PERSON
254
Harbour robbers or dacoits to facilitate offence or screen them.
Memory
HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Best Seven-Section Memory Sequence
248 = FALSE CHARGE
249 = HIDE OFFENDER
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
252 = TAKE TO RECOVER
253 = HIDE ESCAPEE
254 = HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 248
INSTITUTE / CAUSE CRIMINAL PROCEEDING
OR
FALSELY CHARGE PERSON WITH OFFENCE
+
INTENT TO CAUSE INJURY
+
KNOWLEDGE THAT NO JUST OR LAWFUL GROUND EXISTS
= SECTION 248
Punishment Memory
Ordinary case
5 YEARS / ₹2 LAKH / BOTH
Serious false charge
DEATH / LIFE / 10+ → 10 YEARS + FINE
Shortest Memory Rule
“KNOWINGLY USE A FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGE TO INJURE ANOTHER = 248.”
Key Takeaway
Section 248 BNS punishes the deliberate misuse of criminal proceedings against another person.
The essential requirements are:
- A criminal proceeding is instituted or caused to be instituted, or a false criminal charge is made;
- The accused intends to cause injury;
- The accused knows that there is no just or lawful ground for the proceeding or charge.
The ordinary punishment under clause (a) is:
Up to 5 years / fine up to ₹2 lakh / both
Where the false accusation concerns an offence punishable with:
- Death;
- Life imprisonment; or
- Ten years or upwards,
clause (b) provides:
Up to 10 years + fine
According to the supplied classification:
248(a) = Non-cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate First Class
248(b) = Non-cognizable + Bailable + Court of Session
According to the supplied comments:
Section 248 BNS = Section 211 IPC
The BNS significantly increases the punishments while retaining the essential structure of the offence.
Final Memory Line
“248 = FALSE PROCEEDING/CHARGE + INTENT TO INJURE + KNOWING NO JUST OR LAWFUL GROUND.”
- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 249: Harbouring Offender
Introduction
Section 249 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) punishes a person who, after an offence has been committed, harbours or conceals the offender knowing or having reason to believe that the person is the offender, and does so with the intention of screening that offender from legal punishment.
The section therefore deals with post-offence protection.
Its essence is not mere knowledge of an offender’s whereabouts. There must be an act of harbouring or concealment, coupled with the required knowledge or reason to believe and the specific intention to shield the offender from punishment.
Basic Formula
OFFENCE COMMITTED + HARBOUR/CONCEAL + KNOWLEDGE OR REASON TO BELIEVE + INTENT TO SCREEN FROM LEGAL PUNISHMENT = SECTION 249
Q1. What does Section 249 provide?
Answer:
Section 249 applies where:
1. An offence has already been committed;
2. The accused harbours or conceals another person;
3. The accused knows or has reason to believe that the person is the offender; and
4. The harbouring or concealment is done with the intention of screening that offender from legal punishment.
Q2. What is the object of Section 249?
Answer:
The object is to prevent persons from assisting offenders after the commission of crime by:
- Giving them shelter;
- Concealing them;
- Protecting them from detection;
- Helping them avoid lawful punishment.
Core Principle
A person who knowingly shelters or conceals an offender after the crime in order to protect him from punishment may be liable under Section 249.
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 249 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 249 BNS = Section 212 IPC
Q4. What changes were made under BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The substantive language remains unchanged;
- The provision has been rearranged into clauses and an explanation;
- IPC section references in the explanation have been replaced with corresponding BNS provisions;
- The older expression “husband and wife” has been replaced with the gender-neutral term:
“spouse”
Q5. Who can commit the offence under Section 249?
Answer:
The provision uses the word:
“Whoever”
Therefore, it is a general offence and is not limited to public servants.
Q6. What are the essential ingredients of Section 249?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
1. An offence has been committed;
2. The accused harbours or conceals a person;
3. The accused knows or has reason to believe that the person is the offender;
4. The accused intends to screen that person from legal punishment;
5. The spouse exception does not apply.
Formula
OFFENCE + OFFENDER + HARBOUR/CONCEAL + KNOW/REASON TO BELIEVE + SCREENING INTENT = 249
Q7. Must an offence already have been committed?
Answer:
Yes.
The section begins with:
“Whenever an offence has been committed”
Therefore, Section 249 is fundamentally a post-offence provision.
Q8. Does Section 249 apply before an offence is committed?
Answer:
No, not on its own wording.
The section requires that an offence has been committed.
This distinguishes it from provisions such as Section 254, which can extend to persons about to commit robbery or dacoity.
Q9. What act must the accused perform?
Answer:
The accused must:
- Harbour; or
- Conceal
the offender.
Q10. What does “harbour” mean in this context?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments, harbouring generally involves knowingly giving:
- Shelter;
- Aid;
- Protection;
- Assistance
to an offender, especially for the purpose of helping that person evade arrest or punishment.
Q11. What does “conceal” mean?
Answer:
Concealment refers to hiding the offender or otherwise keeping the offender from being discovered.
Memory
HARBOUR = SHELTER/PROTECT
CONCEAL = HIDE
Q12. Is mere knowledge of the offender’s whereabouts enough?
Answer:
No.
According to the supplied comments, merely knowing where an accused person is does not by itself amount to harbouring.
There must be some act amounting to harbouring or concealment.
Q13. Why is mere knowledge insufficient?
Answer:
Because Section 249 punishes an affirmative form of assistance:
- Harbouring; or
- Concealing.
Knowledge alone, without conduct amounting to protection or concealment, does not satisfy the section.
Q14. What mental element is required?
Answer:
The accused must:
Know or have reason to believe
that the person being harboured or concealed is the offender.
Q15. Is actual knowledge always necessary?
Answer:
No.
The statute also covers a person who has:
Reason to believe
that the person is the offender.
Q16. Is mere suspicion sufficient?
Answer:
No.
The statutory standard is:
- Knowledge; or
- Reason to believe.
A vague suspicion is not the same as having reason to believe.
Q17. What further intention is required?
Answer:
The accused must act with the intention:
To screen the offender from legal punishment
This is a crucial ingredient.
Q18. Is harbouring alone sufficient?
Answer:
No.
There must also be:
1. Knowledge or reason to believe that the person is the offender; and
2. Intention to screen that person from legal punishment.
Memory
HARBOURING ALONE ≠ SECTION 249
Q19. What does “screen from legal punishment” mean?
Answer:
It means protecting the offender from the lawful consequences of the offence.
This can include helping the person avoid:
- Detection;
- Apprehension;
- Prosecution;
- Punishment.
Q20. Must the offender actually escape punishment?
Answer:
No.
The section focuses on the accused’s intention to screen.
Actual successful avoidance of punishment is not made an express ingredient.
Q21. Must the accused have participated in the original offence?
Answer:
No.
Section 249 specifically concerns a person who assists after the offence has been committed.
The harbourer may be completely separate from the original crime.
Q22. Must the accused receive money or some benefit?
Answer:
No.
No financial reward or personal gain is required.
The offence is based on:
- Harbouring or concealment;
- Knowledge or reason to believe;
- Screening intent.
Q23. Is physical force required?
Answer:
No.
Violence is not an ingredient.
Q24. Must the offender be convicted before Section 249 can apply?
Answer:
No.
The section refers to a person whom the accused knows or has reason to believe to be the offender.
A prior conviction is not stated as a requirement.
Q25. What is the significance of the phrase “the offender”?
Answer:
It links the person being sheltered or concealed to the offence that has already been committed.
The accused must know or have reason to believe that the person being protected is the person responsible for that offence.
Q26. How is punishment determined under Section 249?
Answer:
Punishment depends on the seriousness of the underlying offence.
There are three categories:
- Clause (a): offence punishable with death;
- Clause (b): offence punishable with life imprisonment or up to ten years;
- Clause (c): offence punishable with imprisonment from one year up to below ten years.
Q27. What is the punishment under clause (a)?
Answer:
If the underlying offence is punishable with:
Death
the harbourer may be punished with:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 5 years; and
- Fine.
Memory
DEATH → 5 YEARS + FINE
Q28. Why is “5 years” important?
Answer:
Because Section 249 differs from several neighbouring screening or harbouring provisions.
For example, Sections 250, 251, and 253 may provide 7 years in their death-punishable category, whereas Section 249 provides:
Up to 5 years
This is a useful exam distinction.
Q29. What is the punishment under clause (b)?
Answer:
If the underlying offence is punishable with:
- Imprisonment for life; or
- Imprisonment which may extend to ten years,
the punishment is:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 3 years; and
- Fine.
Memory
LIFE / 10 YEARS → 3 YEARS + FINE
Q30. What is the punishment under clause (c)?
Answer:
If the underlying offence is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to:
One year and not to ten years
the punishment is:
- Imprisonment of the description provided for the underlying offence;
- Up to one-fourth of the longest term prescribed for that offence;
- Or fine;
- Or both.
Q31. What is the one-fourth rule?
Answer:
Under clause (c):
Maximum Section 249 imprisonment = ¼ of the longest imprisonment provided for the underlying offence
Q32. Give an example where the underlying maximum is eight years.
Answer:
One-fourth of eight years is:
2 years
Therefore, the maximum imprisonment under clause (c) would be two years.
Q33. What if the underlying maximum is four years?
Answer:
One-fourth of four years is:
1 year
Q34. What if the underlying maximum is two years?
Answer:
One-fourth of two years is:
6 months
Q35. Does clause (c) preserve the type of imprisonment attached to the underlying offence?
Answer:
Yes.
The wording states:
“imprisonment of the description provided for the offence”
Therefore, the type of imprisonment follows the underlying offence.
Q36. What is the punishment ladder under Section 249?
Answer:
Remember:
DEATH → 5
LIFE / 10 → 3
1 TO BELOW 10 → ¼
Q37. What does the Explanation to Section 249 provide?
Answer:
The Explanation extends the meaning of “offence” to certain acts committed outside India.
If the conduct occurred outside India but would have been punishable in India under the specifically listed BNS provisions, it is treated for Section 249 as though it had been committed in India.
Q38. Which BNS provisions are specifically listed in the Explanation?
Answer:
The supplied text lists:
- Section 103
- Section 105
- Section 307
- Section 309(2), (3), and (4)
- Section 310(2), (3), (4), and (5)
- Section 311
- Section 312
- Section 326(f) and (g)
- Section 331(4), (6), (7), and (8)
- Section 332(a) and (b)
These are expressly incorporated into the foreign-offence explanation.
Q39. Why is the Explanation important?
Answer:
It prevents a harbourer from avoiding Section 249 merely because the underlying specified act occurred outside India.
Q40. Does every offence committed outside India automatically come within Section 249?
Answer:
No.
The supplied Explanation specifically refers to acts punishable under the listed BNS provisions.
Therefore, the foreign-offence extension should be read according to the wording of the Explanation.
Q41. What legal fiction does the Explanation create?
Answer:
For Section 249, the listed qualifying foreign act is treated:
As though the accused had been guilty of it in India
Q42. What is the statutory exception?
Answer:
Section 249 does not extend to a case where the harbouring or concealment is done by:
The spouse of the offender
Q43. Does the spouse exception apply to both harbouring and concealment?
Answer:
Yes.
The exception expressly refers to:
“harbour or concealment”
Q44. Does the exception extend to every relative?
Answer:
No.
The supplied text expressly mentions only the:
Spouse
It does not state a general exception for:
- Parents;
- Children;
- Siblings;
- Other relatives.
Q45. What BNS drafting change was made to the exception?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The earlier reference to “husband and wife” was replaced by:
“spouse”
Q46. What does the supplied Illustration show?
Answer:
The Illustration states that:
- A knows B has committed dacoity;
- A knowingly conceals B;
- A intends to screen B from legal punishment.
Because B is liable to imprisonment for life, A may be punished under the corresponding category with:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 3 years; and
- Fine.
Q47. What does the Illustration teach about mens rea?
Answer:
It clearly demonstrates two mental elements:
1. A knows B committed the offence;
2. A conceals B specifically to screen him from punishment.
Thus:
KNOWLEDGE + SCREENING INTENT
are both central.
Q48. What does the Illustration teach about punishment?
Answer:
The harbourer’s punishment depends on the punishment attached to the underlying offence committed by the person harboured.
Because dacoity in the Illustration attracts life imprisonment, clause (b) applies.
Q49. Give a simple example of Section 249.
Answer:
Suppose A knows that B has committed a serious offence.
A hides B in a concealed room so that the police cannot find him and does so specifically to protect B from punishment.
Section 249 may apply.
Q50. Give an example where mere knowledge is insufficient.
Answer:
Suppose A knows where B, an offender, is staying but:
- Does not give B shelter;
- Does not conceal B;
- Does not assist B;
- Does not act to screen B.
According to the supplied comments, mere knowledge of B’s whereabouts would not by itself amount to harbouring.
Q51. Give an example where harbouring occurs but screening intent is absent.
Answer:
Suppose A allows B to stay temporarily but does not know or have reason to believe that B is an offender.
The required mental element would be absent.
Similarly, if A knows of B’s offence but the circumstances do not establish an intention to screen B from legal punishment, the statutory ingredients would still have to be proved.
Q52. Is harbouring the same as knowing where an accused is?
Answer:
No.
This is an important point from the supplied comments.
Knowledge of whereabouts
Means simply knowing the location.
Harbouring
Requires some affirmative shelter, aid, protection, concealment, or similar assistance.
Memory
KNOWING ≠ HARBOURING
Q53. Why is Section 249 called a post-offence provision?
Answer:
Because the section begins only:
“Whenever an offence has been committed”
Thus, the offence being screened must already have occurred.
Q54. How does Section 249 differ from Section 254?
Answer:
Section 249
Applies generally to harbouring an offender after an offence has been committed.
The purpose is:
Screening from legal punishment
Section 254
Specifically concerns robbers or dacoits who:
- Are about to commit robbery/dacoity; or
- Have recently committed it.
Its purposes include:
- Facilitating the offence; or
- Screening them from punishment.
Memory
249 = GENERAL OFFENDER AFTER CRIME
254 = ROBBERS/DACOITS BEFORE OR AFTER
Q55. How does Section 249 differ from Section 253?
Answer:
Section 249
The person is harboured because he is known or believed to be the offender after the crime.
Section 253
The person:
- Has escaped from lawful custody; or
- Is subject to a lawful order for apprehension,
and is harboured or concealed to prevent apprehension.
Memory
249 = AFTER OFFENCE
253 = AFTER ESCAPE / APPREHENSION ORDER
Q56. What is the difference in intention between Sections 249 and 253?
Answer:
Section 249 requires:
Intent to screen from legal punishment
Section 253 requires:
Intent to prevent apprehension
These concepts overlap in practical effect but are stated differently and should be kept separate in an exam answer.
Q57. What is the difference between Sections 249 and 250?
Answer:
Section 249
The accused directly:
- Harbours; or
- Conceals
an offender.
Section 250
The accused:
- Accepts;
- Attempts to obtain; or
- Agrees to accept
gratification or restitution in consideration of concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
249 = HIDE
250 = TAKE BENEFIT TO HIDE/SCREEN
Q58. What is the difference between Sections 249 and 251?
Answer:
Section 249
Direct harbouring or concealment of offender.
Section 251
Giving or offering gratification, or restoring property, in consideration of another person's:
- Concealing;
- Screening;
- Not proceeding.
Memory
249 = HARBOUR
251 = PAY SOMEONE TO SCREEN
Q59. What is the classification under Section 249?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification, clauses 249(a), (b), and (c) are:
- Cognizable
- Bailable
- Magistrate of the First Class
Memory
C + B + MFC
Q60. Is Section 249 cognizable?
Answer:
Yes.
All three supplied clauses are:
Cognizable
Q61. Is Section 249 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
All three clauses are:
Bailable
Q62. Which Court may try Section 249?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
Magistrate of the First Class
Q63. What is the easiest exam test for Section 249?
Answer:
Ask:
1. Has an offence already been committed?
2. Did the accused harbour or conceal another person?
3. Did the accused know or have reason to believe that person was the offender?
4. Was the intention to screen the offender from legal punishment?
5. What is the punishment attached to the underlying offence?
6. Does the spouse exception apply?
7. If the underlying act occurred outside India, does it fall within the specified Explanation?
Q64. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“OFFENCE DONE + KNOW OFFENDER + HARBOUR/HIDE + SCREEN FROM PUNISHMENT = 249.”
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Timing
Section 249 applies:
AFTER THE OFFENCE HAS BEEN COMMITTED
2. Act
The accused:
HARBOURS OR CONCEALS
the offender.
3. Knowledge
The accused:
KNOWS OR HAS REASON TO BELIEVE
that the person is the offender.
4. Intention
The purpose must be:
TO SCREEN THE OFFENDER FROM LEGAL PUNISHMENT
5. Mere Knowledge Is Not Enough
According to the supplied comments:
KNOWING THE WHEREABOUTS ≠ HARBOURING
There must be some act of aid, shelter, protection, concealment, or similar assistance.
Punishment Study Notes
Clause (a): Underlying offence punishable with death
Punishment:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 5 years;
- Fine also.
Memory
DEATH → 5
Clause (b): Underlying offence punishable with life or up to 10 years
Punishment:
- Imprisonment of either description up to 3 years;
- Fine also.
Memory
LIFE / 10 → 3
Clause (c): Underlying offence punishable from 1 year to below 10 years
Punishment:
- Same description of imprisonment as underlying offence;
- Up to ¼ of longest term;
- Or fine;
- Or both.
Memory
1 TO BELOW 10 → ¼
Punishment Ladder
DEATH → 5 YEARS
LIFE / 10 → 3 YEARS
1 TO BELOW 10 → ONE-FOURTH
Explanation Study Notes
The Explanation extends Section 249 to certain specified acts committed:
OUTSIDE INDIA
where those acts would be punishable in India under the listed BNS provisions.
Memory
SPECIFIED FOREIGN OFFENCE CAN BE TREATED AS INDIAN OFFENCE FOR SECTION 249
Exception Study Notes
Section 249 does not extend where harbouring or concealment is by:
THE SPOUSE OF THE OFFENDER
According to the supplied comments, BNS replaces the older wording:
“husband and wife”
with:
“spouse”
Difference Between Sections 249–254
Section 249
Harbour offender after crime
Act:
- Harbour/conceal.
Intent:
- Screen from punishment.
Memory
249 = HIDE OFFENDER
Section 250
Take benefit to screen
Act:
- Accept/attempt/agreed acceptance of gratification or restitution.
Memory
250 = TAKE TO SCREEN
Section 251
Give benefit to screen
Act:
- Give/offer gratification or restore property.
Memory
251 = GIVE TO SCREEN
Section 252
Take gratification to help recover property
Special requirement:
- Must use all means to cause apprehension and conviction.
Memory
252 = TAKE TO RECOVER
Section 253
Harbour escapee or wanted person
Intent:
- Prevent apprehension.
Memory
253 = HIDE WANTED PERSON
Section 254
Harbour robbers or dacoits
Intent:
- Facilitate robbery/dacoity; or
- Screen them from punishment.
Memory
254 = HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Quick Revision Notes
Section
249 BNS
Title
Harbouring offender
IPC Equivalent
212 IPC
Timing
After offence has been committed.
Act
Harbour or conceal offender.
Mental Element
Know or have reason to believe person is offender.
Intention
Screen offender from legal punishment.
Punishment
- Death offence → up to 5 years + fine
- Life/10-year offence → up to 3 years + fine
- 1 year to below 10 years → ¼ maximum / fine / both
Explanation
Specified foreign acts are included.
Exception
Spouse of offender.
Classification
Cognizable + Bailable + Magistrate First Class
BNS Changes
- Rearranged into clauses and explanation;
- IPC references replaced by corresponding BNS sections;
- “husband and wife” replaced with “spouse.”
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Forgetting that the offence must already have been committed
Section 249 is post-offence.
Trap 2 — Treating mere knowledge of whereabouts as harbouring
Incorrect.
According to the supplied comments:
MERE KNOWLEDGE ≠ HARBOURING
Trap 3 — Forgetting “reason to believe”
Actual knowledge is not the only standard.
Trap 4 — Forgetting screening intent
Harbouring must be done:
To screen the offender from legal punishment
Trap 5 — Thinking actual escape from punishment is necessary
Incorrect.
The section focuses on intention to screen.
Trap 6 — Using 7 years for clause (a)
Incorrect.
For Section 249:
Death-punishable underlying offence → 5 years
This distinguishes it from some neighbouring provisions.
Trap 7 — Forgetting the one-fourth rule
Clause (c):
¼ of longest term
Trap 8 — Thinking all foreign offences are automatically covered
The Explanation specifically identifies the relevant BNS provisions.
Trap 9 — Extending the spouse exception to all relatives
The express exception is limited to:
Spouse
Trap 10 — Confusing Section 249 with Section 253
Remember:
249 = OFFENDER AFTER CRIME
253 = ESCAPEE / APPREHENSION ORDER
Trap 11 — Confusing Section 249 with Section 254
Remember:
249 = GENERAL OFFENDER
254 = ROBBER / DACOIT
Rapid Revision Chain: Sections 249–254
249
Harbour or conceal offender after crime to screen from punishment.
Memory
HIDE OFFENDER
250
Take benefit to conceal, screen, or not proceed.
Memory
TAKE TO SCREEN
251
Give benefit to obtain concealment, screening, or non-prosecution.
Memory
GIVE TO SCREEN
252
Take gratification to recover movable property but fail to pursue offender.
Memory
TAKE TO RECOVER
253
Harbour or conceal escapee/wanted person to prevent apprehension.
Memory
HIDE WANTED PERSON
254
Harbour robbers/dacoits to facilitate or screen.
Memory
HARBOUR ROBBERS/DACOITS
Best Six-Section Memory Sequence
249 = HIDE
250 = TAKE
251 = GIVE
252 = RECOVER
253 = ESCAPEE
254 = ROBBERS/DACOITS
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 249
OFFENCE ALREADY COMMITTED
+
HARBOUR OR CONCEAL
+
KNOW / REASON TO BELIEVE PERSON IS OFFENDER
+
INTENT TO SCREEN FROM LEGAL PUNISHMENT
= SECTION 249
Punishment Memory
DEATH → 5
LIFE / 10 → 3
1 TO BELOW 10 → ¼
Exception Memory
SPOUSE = EXCLUDED
Shortest Memory Rule
“KNOWINGLY HIDE AN OFFENDER AFTER THE CRIME TO SAVE HIM FROM PUNISHMENT = 249.”
Key Takeaway
Section 249 BNS is the general provision dealing with harbouring or concealment of an offender after an offence has already been committed.
The prosecution must establish:
- An offence has been committed;
- The accused harboured or concealed the offender;
- The accused knew or had reason to believe that the person was the offender;
- The accused intended to screen that person from legal punishment.
Mere knowledge of the offender’s whereabouts is not enough according to the supplied comments.
The punishment depends on the underlying offence:
Death → up to 5 years + fine
Life / 10 years → up to 3 years + fine
1 year to below 10 years → up to one-fourth of the longest term, or fine, or both
The provision also contains:
- A special Explanation concerning specified foreign offences; and
- A spouse exception.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 249 BNS = Section 212 IPC
and the key drafting changes are the rearrangement into clauses and explanation, replacement of IPC references by corresponding BNS sections, and substitution of “husband and wife” with “spouse.”
Final Memory Line
“249 = OFFENCE COMMITTED + KNOW OFFENDER + HARBOUR/CONCEAL + SCREEN FROM PUNISHMENT + SPOUSE EXCEPTION.”