- 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.”
