Forgery is the offence of making a false document or electronic record with the intent to cause damage or injury, to support a fraudulent claim, or to commit or facilitate fraud. Under Indian law, forgery is defined in Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (now Section 336 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and is punishable with imprisonment up to two years, or with enhanced penalties of up to seven years when committed for the purpose of cheating or against public records.
Legal definition
Section 463 IPC (Section 336 BNS) provides:
Whoever makes any false document or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record, with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.
Making a false document — Section 464 IPC (Section 335 BNS) defines three ways in which a false document is made:
- Signing or executing dishonestly or fraudulently: Making, signing, sealing, or executing a document in the name of a fictitious person, or in the name of another person without their authority, or in the name of a deceased person
- Altering a genuine document: Dishonestly or fraudulently altering or cancelling a material part of a genuine document after it has been signed, sealed, or executed
- Deceiving an incapable person: Dishonestly or fraudulently causing a person to sign, seal, or execute a document who by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication is incapable of knowing its contents
Graded punishment under BNS:
- Simple forgery (Section 336(2) BNS): imprisonment up to 2 years, or fine, or both
- Forgery for the purpose of cheating (Section 336(3) BNS): imprisonment up to 7 years and fine
- Forgery of court records, government identity documents, public registers, and official certificates (Section 337 BNS): imprisonment up to 7 years and fine
Notable BNS expansion: Section 337 BNS explicitly covers government-issued identity documents such as Aadhaar cards, voter ID cards, and passports — a significant addition not present in the IPC, reflecting modern identity document fraud.
How courts have interpreted this term
Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar [(2009) 8 SCC 751]
The Supreme Court held that the essential ingredient of forgery is the making of a false document with a dishonest or fraudulent intent. Merely signing a document that contains incorrect information is not forgery if the document itself is not "false" — the distinction is between a genuine document containing false statements (which may be cheating, not forgery) and a document that is itself fabricated or falsely attributed.
Sheila Sebastian v. R. Jawaharaj [(2018) 7 SCC 581]
The Court clarified the distinction between a "false document" and a "falsely made document." A document is "false" when it purports to be something it is not — for example, a document purporting to bear the signature of X when X never signed it. A document is not forged merely because the statements within it are untrue. The document itself must be fabricated.
Ram Narain Poply v. CBI [(2003) 3 SCC 641]
The Supreme Court held that forgery is a distinct offence from cheating, though both may co-exist in the same transaction. Forgery relates to the creation of the false document; cheating relates to the deception practised using that document. A person can be charged with both offences when a forged document is used to deceive another.
Why this matters
Forgery is one of the most common white-collar criminal charges in India, arising in property transactions, banking fraud, employment disputes, and identity theft. The offence is frequently charged alongside cheating (Section 420 IPC / Section 318 BNS) and criminal breach of trust (Section 405 IPC / Section 316 BNS) in financial crime cases.
For legal practitioners, the distinction between a forged document and a genuine document containing false statements is critical. A forged sale deed — where the seller's signature is fabricated — attracts forgery charges. But a genuine sale deed that misrepresents the property dimensions may attract cheating charges but not forgery. This distinction often determines which sections are invoked in the chargesheet.
The BNS's explicit inclusion of government identity documents under Section 337 addresses the growing problem of Aadhaar fraud, voter ID forgery, and passport fraud. Under the old IPC, prosecutors had to rely on general forgery provisions; the BNS provides specific coverage, potentially improving prosecution rates in identity document cases.
Related terms
Related offences:
Related concepts:
Broader concepts:
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between forgery and cheating?
Forgery (Section 463 IPC / Section 336 BNS) relates to the creation of a false document. Cheating (Section 415 IPC / Section 318 BNS) relates to the deception of a person to induce them to deliver property or do something they would not otherwise do. The two offences often co-exist — a person may forge a document (forgery) and then use it to deceive another (cheating).
Is forgery a bailable or non-bailable offence?
Simple forgery under Section 465 IPC (Section 336(2) BNS) is bailable. However, forgery for the purpose of cheating under Section 468 IPC (Section 336(3) BNS) and forgery of valuable security or government records under Section 467 IPC (Section 337 BNS) is non-bailable and carries a maximum of 7 years.
Does forgery cover electronic documents?
Yes. Both Section 463 IPC and Section 336 BNS explicitly cover false "electronic records" in addition to physical documents. Creating a forged electronic signature, fabricating a digital contract, or altering electronic financial records all constitute forgery under Indian law.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.