Sections 201–211 IPC vs Sections 238–248 BNS — Offences Against Public Justice

In India, Sections 238 to 248 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) replaced Sections 201 to 211 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) on 1 July 2024. Most provisions are unchanged; a false charge with intent to injure (Section 248) now carries up to five years, or ten where the charge is of a serious offence.

At a glance

All terms are imprisonment of either description except Section 238(c), which follows "the description provided for the offence". The CrPC First Schedule classified Sections 201 to 210 IPC in the same way. For Section 211 it had three rows: the basic offence and a false charge of an offence punishable with seven years or more were triable by a Magistrate of the first class, and only a false charge of a capital offence or one punishable with life went to a Court of Session. None of these offences is compoundable under Section 359 BNSS, as none was under Section 320 CrPC.

What changed

• Modified — Section 248 BNS (IPC 211). Clause (a): "a term which may extend to two years, or with fine" becomes "five years, or with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees". Clause (b): the trigger changes from a false charge of an offence punishable with "death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for seven years or upwards" to "ten years or upwards", and the maximum from seven to ten years. On a reading of the text, a false charge of an offence punishable with seven to nine years now falls under clause (a), with its five-year maximum. The India Code IPC text prints a Chhattisgarh amendment (Chhattisgarh Act 25 of 2015) adding a proviso to Section 211 for false charges of offences under Sections 354, 354A to 354E, 376B, 376C, 376F, 509, 509A and 509B (not less than three and up to five years, and fine); Section 248 BNS has no such proviso.
• Modified — Section 241 BNS (IPC 204). "two years, or with fine" becomes "three years, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees"; "Court of Justice" becomes "Court"; the heading adds "or electronic record".
• Modified — Section 243 BNS (IPC 206). "two years or with fine" becomes "three years, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees"; "Court of Justice" becomes "Court" twice.
• Modified — Section 239 BNS (IPC 202). The six-month term is unchanged; "or with fine" becomes "or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees". Under Section 63 IPC (now Section 8(1) BNS), a fine with no stated sum is "unlimited, but shall not be excessive".
• Minor edit — Section 238 BNS (IPC 201). The three punishment limbs become clauses (a), (b) and (c), and the marginal limb notes ("if a capital offence", and so on) are dropped. The terms, the one-fourth rule and the Illustration are unchanged.
• Modified — Section 240 BNS (IPC 203). The Explanation now refers to "sections 238 and 239" and lists BNS section numbers (103, 105, 307, 309(2)–(4), 310(2)–(5), 311, 312, 326(f)–(g), 331(4) and (6)–(8), and 332(a)–(b)) in place of IPC 302, 304, 382, 392 to 399, 402, 435, 436, 449, 450 and 457 to 460. The new list names sub-sections (2) to (4) of Section 309 but not sub-sections (5) and (6), which carry attempt to commit robbery and voluntarily causing hurt in robbery (the words of IPC 393 and 394), so on a reading of the text those two acts abroad are no longer listed. The punishment is unchanged.
• Minor edit — Sections 244, 245, 246 and 247. Section 244 reads "Court" for "Court of Justice" and "practises" for "practices"; Section 245's Illustration adds a comma ("Z, knowing"); Section 246 reads "Court" for "Court of Justice" (the India Code IPC heading prints "Dishonesty making false claim"); Section 247 drops a comma after "a larger sum than is due".
• Identical — Section 242 BNS (IPC 205).

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 211 IPC (repealed from 1 July 2024), second limb:

and if such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for seven years or upwards, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Extract, Section 248 BNS:

Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person,— (a) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees, or with both; (b) if such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for ten years or upwards, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

How it works — the ingredients

Screening an offender (Section 238). (i) An offence has been committed; (ii) the accused knows or has reason to believe it; (iii) he causes evidence of it to disappear, or gives information about it that he knows or believes to be false; (iv) with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment. The punishment is graded by the offence screened. Illustration: A, knowing B has murdered Z, helps B hide the body to screen him; A is liable to seven years and fine.

Duty to inform and false information (Sections 239 and 240). Section 239 applies only to a person "legally bound" to give information. Section 33(1) BNSS, for example, requires every person aware of the commission of listed offences (including Sections 103 to 105, 111 to 113, 309 to 312 and 331 to 332 BNS) to inform the nearest Magistrate or police officer "in the absence of any reasonable excuse". Section 240 applies to anyone who knows or has reason to believe an offence has been committed and gives information about it that he knows or believes to be false.

Evidence and proceedings (Sections 241 and 242). Section 241 covers secreting, destroying, obliterating or making illegible a document or electronic record that the accused "may be lawfully compelled to produce as evidence" in a Court or before a public servant, intending to prevent its use. Section 242 covers personating another to make an admission, confess judgment, cause process to issue, become bail or security, or do any other act in a suit or prosecution.

Fraud on forfeitures and decrees (Sections 243 to 247). Removing, concealing or transferring property (243), or falsely claiming it (244), to stop it being taken as a forfeiture, in satisfaction of a fine, or in execution of a decree; suffering a decree for a sum not due (245); making a known false claim in a Court (246); and obtaining a decree for a sum not due (247).

False charge (Section 248). (i) Instituting or causing to be instituted criminal proceedings, or falsely charging a person with an offence; (ii) with intent to cause him injury; (iii) knowing there is no just or lawful ground. Clause (b) applies where the proceeding is instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, life or ten years or more.

What this means in practice

For a person falsely accused

• Which forum. Section 215(1)(b)(i) BNSS bars cognizance of offences under Sections 242 to 248 BNS "when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court", except on the written complaint of that Court, an officer it authorises in writing, or a Court to which it is subordinate. Section 195(1)(b)(i) CrPC covered Sections 205 to 211 IPC. The Court acts under Section 379 BNSS if it considers an inquiry "expedient in the interests of justice".
• Which limb. Check the maximum sentence of the offence falsely charged: clause (b) of Section 248 needs death, life or ten years or more.

For the investigating officer and prosecutor

• Section 238 needs proof that an offence was committed and that the accused knew or had reason to believe so (see Palvinder Kaur). Acquittal of the main offence does not by itself end a Section 238 charge (see V.L. Tresa).
• For Section 238(a), the First Schedule makes cognizability follow "the offence in relation to which disappearance of evidence is caused"; clauses (b) and (c) are non-cognizable, so Section 174(2) BNSS (no investigation of a non-cognizable case without a Magistrate's order) applies to them when charged alone.

For civil litigants

• Sections 243 to 247 BNS apply to conduct around decrees and forfeitures. Sections 243 to 247 are in the list of offences in Section 215(1)(b)(i) BNSS, so when committed in or in relation to a Court proceeding they need that Court's complaint.

Judgments that still matter

Palvinder Kaur v. The State of Punjab, [1953] S.C.R. 94 — 22 October 1952. A three-Judge Bench (Mahajan, Chandrasekhara Aiyar and Bhagwati JJ.; judgment by Mahajan J.) considered a conviction under Section 201 IPC entered by the High Court after acquitting the appellant of her husband's murder. The Court held that to establish the charge it is essential to prove that an offence has been committed — "mere suspicion that it has been committed is not sufficient" — that the accused knew or had reason to believe it, and that she then caused the evidence to disappear or gave false information with intent to screen the offender. As there was no evidence affirmatively establishing the cause of death, the charge under Section 201 failed. The appeal was allowed and the conviction under Section 201 set aside. The report shows no paragraph numbers.

V.L. Tresa v. State of Kerala, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 973 (2001 INSC 83) — 9 February 2001. Umesh C. Banerjee and K.G. Balakrishnan JJ. (judgment by Banerjee J.) considered whether a conviction under Section 201 IPC can stand after acquittal of the principal offence. The Court listed the ingredients: commission of an offence; knowledge or reason to believe it was committed; causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information; and intention to screen the offender. On the facts — the death was due to homicide, the wife "alone could explain" it, and both courts below had disbelieved her version — it held that "the falsity of information given by the accused" warranted punishment under Section 201, there being "a deliberate attempt to screen the offender from legal punishment". The appeal was dismissed and the High Court's reduced sentence confirmed. The report shows no paragraph numbers.

Santokh Singh v. Izhar Hussain and Anr., [1974] 1 S.C.R. 78 (1973 INSC 96) — 25 April 1973. K.K. Mathew and I.D. Dua JJ. (judgment by Dua J.) set aside a High Court direction to file a complaint under Section 211 IPC against a witness. The Court held that a statement on oath falsely supporting a prosecution more appropriately amounts to an offence under Sections 193 and 195 IPC, not Section 211, and that the two sets of offences were not intended to overlap so as to make it optional which to invoke. It added that "Every incorrect or false statement does not make it incumbent on the court to order prosecution." The appeal was allowed. The case arose under the Code of 1898; it is cited here only for what it says about Section 211 IPC, whose operative words Section 248 BNS repeats. The report shows no paragraph numbers.

No Supreme Court judgment applying Sections 238 to 248 BNS was found in the material searched for this page. The three judgments construe words that the BNS repeats, so on a reading of the text their reasoning remains relevant.

Which law applies to your case

Section 358(2) BNS preserves penalties incurred under the IPC and allows proceedings to be instituted, continued or enforced "as if that Code had not been repealed"; on a reading of that provision, conduct before 1 July 2024 is charged under Sections 201 to 211 IPC. Procedure for matters pending on that date continues under the CrPC (Section 531(2)(a) BNSS). Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars a penalty greater than the law in force at the time, so, on a reading of that Article, the higher maxima in Sections 241, 243 and 248 BNS cannot be applied to earlier conduct. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNS equivalent of Section 201 IPC? Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 201 IPC. Causing evidence of an offence to disappear, or giving false information about it, to screen the offender is punishable according to the offence screened: up to seven years and fine if it is punishable with death; up to three years and fine if punishable with life or up to ten years; otherwise up to one-fourth of the longest term for that offence, or fine, or both.

What is the BNS section for a false case (Section 211 IPC)? Section 248 BNS replaces Section 211 IPC. Instituting criminal proceedings, or falsely charging a person with an offence, with intent to injure and knowing there is no just or lawful ground, is punishable with up to five years, or fine up to ₹2 lakh, or both (Section 211 IPC: two years). Where the false charge is of an offence punishable with death, life or ten years or more, the maximum is ten years and fine (Section 211 IPC: seven years, for offences of seven years or more).

Which offences in this group got heavier punishments under the BNS? Section 248 (false charge) rises from two to five years for the basic offence and from seven to ten years for the aggravated form. Section 241 (destroying a document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence) and Section 243 (fraudulently removing property to defeat a forfeiture, fine or decree) rise from two to three years, with fines capped at ₹5,000. Section 239 keeps six months but caps the fine at ₹5,000.

Can a person be convicted of hiding evidence if acquitted of the main offence? Yes, if the other ingredients are proved. In V.L. Tresa v. State of Kerala (2001), the Supreme Court upheld a conviction under Section 201 IPC although the accused had been acquitted of murder, because the death was due to homicide, she alone could explain it, and her false information was a deliberate attempt to screen the offender. In Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab (1952), the Court held that it must first be proved that an offence was committed; mere suspicion is not enough.

Are these offences bailable? Yes. Under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, every offence in Sections 238 to 248 BNS is bailable. All are non-cognizable except Section 238(a), whose cognizability follows the offence in relation to which evidence was made to disappear. Section 238(a) and Section 248(b) are triable by a Court of Session.

Can the victim of a false case file a complaint under Section 248 BNS directly? Not where the false charge is alleged to have been made in, or in relation to, a proceeding in a Court. Section 215(1)(b) BNSS bars cognizance of offences under Sections 242 to 248 BNS in that case except on the written complaint of that Court, an officer it authorises, or a Court to which it is subordinate. Section 195(1)(b) CrPC imposed the same bar on Sections 205 to 211 IPC.

Which law applies to conduct before 1 July 2024? Section 358(2) BNS saves penalties incurred under the IPC and lets proceedings be instituted or continued "as if that Code had not been repealed", so on a reading of that text conduct before 1 July 2024 is charged under Sections 201 to 211 IPC. Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars a penalty greater than the law then in force, so, on a reading of that Article, the higher maxima in Sections 241, 243 and 248 BNS cannot be applied to earlier conduct.

Related

• False evidence: IPC 191-195 vs BNS 227-231
• Contempt of lawful authority: IPC 172-180 vs BNS 206-215
• FIR: CrPC 154 vs BNSS 173
• Inherent powers of the High Court: CrPC 482 vs BNSS 528
• IPC to BNS master table
• Sections 195, 198 and 198A CrPC vs Sections 215, 219 and 220 BNSS — Restrictions on Prosecution: Complaint by Public Servant, Court or Person Aggrieved

Sources

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 8(1), 238 to 248 and 358.
• Indian Penal Code, 1860 (India Code text): Sections 63 and 201 to 211, with the Chhattisgarh amendment printed after Section 211.
• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 33, 174, 215, 379 and 531, the Section 359 compounding tables, and the First Schedule entries for Sections 238 to 248 BNS.
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 195, Section 320 and the First Schedule entries for Sections 201 to 211 IPC.
• Constitution of India: Article 20(1).
• Judgments read in full text: Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab (1953_1_94_108_EN.md); V.L. Tresa v. State of Kerala (2001_1_973_983_EN.md); Santokh Singh v. Izhar Hussain (1974_1_78_86_EN.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.