IPC 463 / 465 in the new BNS 2023

If you have been named in an FIR or notice under this section, the section number alone does not decide the outcome — the facts, the evidence and the procedure do. Many cases turn on procedural lapses, bail strategy and the exact ingredients of the offence.

Forgery is the making of a false document with a fraudulent intention, and the definition is narrower than everyday usage suggests: a document is not forged merely because it contains a lie. What makes it false is a misrepresentation about who made it, or when or where. Under the BNS the definition sits at Section 336(1) and the punishment for simple forgery at Section 336(2).

What the section requires

For the offence to be made out, these ingredients have to be established:

• the accused made a false document or false electronic record, or part of one
• the making was done with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, to support any claim or title, to cause any person to part with property, to enter into an express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed
• the document was false in the sense the section defines — made or executed with the dishonest or fraudulent intention of causing it to be believed that it was made by or under the authority of someone who did not authorise it, or at a time or place at which it was not made

What changed from the IPC

The offence and the punishment are carried over without substantive change: imprisonment of either description which may extend to two years, or a fine, or both. The structural change is a substantial consolidation. The IPC dealt with forgery across Sections 463 to 471, with the definition at 463, simple forgery at 465, forgery for the purpose of cheating at 468 and forgery for harming reputation at 469. BNS 336 gathers the definition and three of the punishing provisions into one section: 336(1) defines forgery, 336(2) punishes it with two years, 336(3) punishes forgery intended for cheating with seven years, and 336(4) punishes forgery intended to harm reputation with three years. The gravest forms — forgery of a valuable security or a will — remain separate at Section 338.

How this section is distinguished from related offences

Which provision applies turns on the intention behind the forgery and on the kind of document. Simple forgery under 336(2) carries two years; where the intention was that the document be used for cheating, 336(3) raises that to seven; where it was to harm reputation, 336(4) gives three. Forgery of a valuable security, a will, or an authority to adopt a son falls under Section 338 and carries imprisonment for life. Using a forged document as genuine is a separate offence under Section 340(2), punished as though the user had forged it themselves. The essential distinction that decides many cases is between a false document and a document containing false statements: a genuine document signed by the person who purports to have signed it is not forged simply because its contents are untrue, and such conduct is cheating rather than forgery.

How the case proceeds

Simple forgery is tried by a magistrate. The aggravated forms carry higher punishments and, in the case of Section 338, are tried by a Court of Session. Investigation centres on the document itself and on expert examination — handwriting, signature and, increasingly, the forensic examination of electronic records, since the BNS definition covers false electronic records explicitly.

Evidence that usually decides these cases

The document is the case, and expert examination is usually decisive. Handwriting and signature comparison requires admitted or proved specimens, and the quality and contemporaneity of those specimens is frequently the point of challenge. Physical examination of the document — ink, paper, indentation, alterations, the sequence of writing and stamping — is often more reliable than signature comparison alone. Where the record is electronic, metadata, creation and modification timestamps and audit logs are the equivalent, subject to the certification requirements for electronic evidence. Beyond the document, the prosecution must establish intention, which comes from what the document was used or intended to be used for, and the circumstances in which it appeared.

How courts approach sentencing

Under Section 336(2), imprisonment which may extend to two years, or a fine, or both. Under 336(3), where the forgery was intended for cheating, up to seven years with a fine. Under 336(4), where it was intended to harm reputation, up to three years with a fine.

Defences that commonly apply

The most productive defence is usually that the document is not false within the statutory definition — that it was made by the person who purports to have made it, whatever the truth of its contents. Absence of the specific intention required is the next line, since forgery requires one of the intentions the section lists and not merely the making of a document. Where handwriting or signature evidence is relied on, challenging the adequacy of the specimens and the methodology of the comparison is a recognised route, and courts treat opinion evidence of this kind with caution where it stands alone. Where the accused signed in a representative capacity, or with authority they believed they had, the fraudulent intention is contested directly.

How a case under this section typically progresses

The case usually turns on obtaining an expert report, and delays in forensic examination are the principal cause of slow progress. A charge sheet follows the report, and trial is before a magistrate for the simple offence. Where a valuable security or will is involved, the case is committed to a Court of Session and takes considerably longer. Parallel civil proceedings about the document — a title suit, a probate matter, a contractual dispute — very frequently run alongside, and findings in the civil case are often produced in the criminal one.

Documents worth gathering early

Preserve the original document rather than a copy, since expert examination depends on it and a photocopy will not support most forms of analysis. Assemble admitted or provable specimens of the relevant handwriting or signature from around the same period, since contemporaneity affects the reliability of comparison. Where the record is electronic, preserve the original file with its metadata and any audit logs, and note the certification requirements. Collect everything establishing the circumstances in which the document was created and used — instructions, correspondence, the transaction it relates to — since intention is established from context. Where a civil proceeding concerns the same document, keep those papers together with the criminal file.

Note on bail and cognizability. Whether an offence is cognizable, and whether it is bailable, is set by the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, not by the BNS section itself. Because that classification decides whether police can arrest without a warrant and how bail is approached, check it for your specific section with an advocate rather than relying on a general summary.

If you have been named under this section

Establish which sub-section is invoked and what kind of document is involved, because the range runs from two years to imprisonment for life. On the substance, the question that most often decides these cases is whether the document is false in the statutory sense at all. A document that the maker actually signed, containing statements that turn out to be untrue, is not a forged document, and identifying that distinction early frequently disposes of the charge or converts it into a cheating allegation with different ingredients.

Common misunderstandings

"A document with false contents is forged."
Not necessarily. Forgery requires a misrepresentation about who made the document, or when or where it was made. A genuine document containing untrue statements is not forged.

"All forgery carries the same punishment."
It does not. Simple forgery carries two years, forgery intended for cheating seven, forgery intended to harm reputation three, and forgery of a valuable security or will imprisonment for life.

"Electronic records are not covered."
They are. The definition expressly covers false electronic records.

"Using a forged document is a lesser offence than making it."
It is not. Section 340(2) punishes a person who uses a forged document as genuine in the same manner as if they had forged it themselves.

Related BNS sections

• BNS 336 — Forgery
• BNS 338 — Forgery of a valuable security or will (IPC 467)
• BNS 340 — Using as genuine a forged document (IPC 471)
• BNS 318 — Cheating (IPC 420)

Which code applies to your case

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 replaced the Indian Penal Code 1860 with effect from 1 July 2024, and the change is not retrospective. The date the offence is alleged to have been committed decides which code governs it. An offence alleged to have occurred on or after 1 July 2024 proceeds under the BNS. An offence alleged to have occurred before that date continues to be investigated, tried, appealed and punished under the IPC, even where the FIR was registered later. Cases from the transition period frequently cite both numbering systems, which is why the old section number remains worth knowing.

Named under this section? Ask the free AI Advocate →

General information for understanding the IPC→BNS change, not legal advice. The BNS restructured many offences — confirm the exact section, sub-section and punishment with a licensed advocate.