Section 335 BNS: Making a false document

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 335 BNS at a Glance

Section 335 BNS deals with making a false document. It replaced Section 464 IPC on 1 July 2024.

Punishment

None. Section 335 BNS is a definition section and prescribes no punishment. Making a false document with an intent specified in Section 336(1) BNS constitutes forgery, which is punished under Section 336(2) BNS and subsequent sections.

IPC Equivalent

Section 464 →

Section 335 BNS Bare Act Text

335. Making a false document

A person is said to make a false document or false electronic record—

(A) Who dishonestly or fraudulently—

(i) makes, signs, seals or executes a document or part of a document;

(ii) makes or transmits any electronic record or part of any electronic record;

(iii) affixes any electronic signature on any electronic record;

(iv) makes any mark denoting the execution of a document or the authenticity of the electronic signature, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document or part of document, electronic record or electronic signature was made, signed, sealed, executed, transmitted or affixed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed, executed or affixed; or

(B) Who without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or otherwise, alters a document or an electronic record in any material part thereof, after it has been made, executed or affixed with electronic signature either by himself or by any other person, whether such person be living or dead at the time of such alteration; or

(C) Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document or an electronic record or to affix his electronic signature on any electronic record knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or that by reason of deception practised upon him, he does not know the contents of the document or electronic record or the nature of the alteration.

Illustrations

(a) A has a letter of credit upon B for rupees 10,000, written by Z. A, in order to defraud B, adds cipher to the 10,000, and makes the sum 1,00,000 intending that it may be believed by B that Z so wrote the letter. A has committed forgery.

(b) A, without Z’s authority, affixes Z’s seal to a document purporting to be a conveyance of an estate from Z to A, with the intention of selling the estate to B and thereby of obtaining from B the purchase-money. A has committed forgery.

(c) A picks up a cheque on a banker signed by B, payable to bearer, but without any sum having been inserted in the cheque. A fraudulently fills up the cheque by inserting the sum of ten thousand rupees. A commits forgery.

(d) A leaves with B, his agent, a cheque on a banker, signed by A, without inserting the sum payable and authorises B to fill up the cheque by inserting a sum not exceeding ten thousand rupees for the purpose of making certain payments. B fraudulently fills up the cheque by inserting the sum of twenty thousand rupees. B commits forgery.

(e) A draws a bill of exchange on himself in the name of B without B’s authority, intending to discount it as a genuine bill with a banker and intending to take up the bill on its maturity. Here, as A draws the bill with intent to deceive the banker by leading him to suppose that he had the security of B, and thereby to discount the bill, A is guilty of forgery.

(f) Z’s will contains these words—“I direct that all my remaining property be equally divided between A, B and C.” A dishonestly scratches out B’s name, intending that it may be believed that the whole was left to himself and C. A has committed forgery.

(g) A endorses a Government promissory note and makes it payable to Z or his order by writing on the bill the words “Pay to Z or his order” and signing the endorsement. B dishonestly erases the words “Pay to Z or his order”, and thereby converts the special endorsement into a blank endorsement. B commits forgery.

(h) A sells and conveys an estate to Z. A afterwards, in order to defraud Z of his estate, executes a conveyance of the same estate to B, dated six months earlier than the date of the conveyance to Z, intending it to be believed that he had conveyed the estate to B before he conveyed it to Z. A has committed forgery.

(i) Z dictates his will to A. A intentionally writes down a different legatee from the legatee named by Z, and by representing to Z that he has prepared the will according to his instructions, induces Z to sign the will. A has committed forgery.

(j) A writes a letter and signs it with B’s name without B’s authority, certifying that A is a man of good character and in distressed circumstances from unforeseen misfortune, intending by means of such letter to obtain alms from Z and other persons. Here, as A made a false document in order to induce Z to part with property, A has committed forgery.

(k) A without B’s authority writes a letter and signs it in B’s name certifying to A’s character, intending thereby to obtain employment under Z. A has committed forgery in as much as he intended to deceive Z by the forged certificate, and thereby to induce Z to enter into an express or implied contract for service.

Explanation 1.—A man’s signature of his own name may amount to forgery.

Illustrations

(a) A signs his own name to a bill of exchange, intending that it may be believed that the bill was drawn by another person of the same name. A has committed forgery.

(b) A writes the word “accepted” on a piece of paper and signs it with Z’s name, in order that B may afterwards write on the paper a bill of exchange drawn by B upon Z, and negotiate the bill as though it had been accepted by Z. A is guilty of forgery; and if B, knowing the fact, draws the bill upon the paper pursuant to A’s intention, B is also guilty of forgery.

(c) A picks up a bill of exchange payable to the order of a different person of the same name. A endorses the bill in his own name, intending to cause it to be believed that it was endorsed by the person to whose order it was payable; here A has committed forgery.

(d) A purchases an estate sold under execution of a decree against B. B, after the seizure of the estate, in collusion with Z, executes a lease of the estate, to Z at a nominal rent and for a long period and dates the lease six months prior to the seizure, with intent to defraud A, and to cause it to be believed that the lease was granted before the seizure. B, though he executes the lease in his own name, commits forgery by antedating it.

(e) A, a trader, in anticipation of insolvency, lodges effects with B for A’s benefit, and with intent to defraud his creditors; and in order to give a colour to the transaction, writes a promissory note binding himself to pay to B a sum for value received, and antedates the note, intending that it may be believed to have been made before A was on the point of insolvency. A has committed forgery under the first head of the definition.

Explanation 2.—The making of a false document in the name of a fictitious person, intending it to be believed that the document was made by a real person, or in the name of a deceased person, intending it to be believed that the document was made by the person in his lifetime, may amount to forgery.

Illustration

A draws a bill of exchange upon a fictitious person, and fraudulently accepts the bill in the name of such fictitious person with intent to negotiate it. A commits forgery.

Explanation 3.—For the purposes of this section, the expression “affixing electronic signature” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000).

Source: Section 335, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 335 BNS in Simple Words

Section 335 BNS of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) explains when a document is treated as a false document. It does not punish every wrong or disputed paper. The law focuses on how the document was made, altered, or used, and whether there was dishonest or fraudulent intent.

In simple terms, a document becomes false if someone signs, seals, executes, or alters it in a way that makes it appear to have been made by someone else, or when it is changed without authority so that it misrepresents the truth. This section applies to anyone who creates or changes a document with the required dishonest intention. It is often used in cases involving forged signatures, fake authorisations, altered sale papers, false affidavits, or fabricated records.

Its practical importance is high because many other offences, such as forgery, depend on proving that a false document was first made within the meaning of this section. Without Section 335 BNS, a prosecution for forgery may fail at the foundation stage.

Ingredients of Section 335 BNS

  • Under the first clause: dishonestly or fraudulently making, signing, sealing, executing or transmitting a document or electronic record, or affixing an electronic signature or mark of authenticity, intending it to be believed that it was done by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not done
  • Under the second clause: altering a document or electronic record in a material part without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, after execution
  • Under the third clause: dishonestly or fraudulently causing a person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document or electronic record, knowing that the person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or by reason of deception practised upon him does not, know its contents or the nature of the alteration

Punishment Under Section 335 BNS

Imprisonment

None. Section 335 BNS is a definition section and prescribes no punishment. Making a false document with an intent specified in Section 336(1) BNS constitutes forgery, which is punished under Section 336(2) BNS and subsequent sections.

Fine

None. Section 335 BNS prescribes no fine. Financial penalties are governed by the substantive offence of forgery under Section 336(2) BNS and related provisions.

Section 335 BNS defines making a false document without prescribing any punishment of its own. Penalties are enacted under Section 336(2) BNS and subsequent sections.

Example of Section 335 BNS

At an office in Raipur, Imran found in a drawer a bank cheque signed by his employer Swati, with the payable sum left blank. Without authority from Swati, Imran filled up the cheque by inserting ninety-five thousand rupees and delivered it to Anjali to satisfy a personal debt, intending Anjali to believe that Swati had authorized that amount. Imran made a false document under the first head of Section 335 BNS by dishonestly making a material part of a document with the intention of causing it to be believed that it was made under authority which he knew was never given. Because he did so with intent to commit fraud, his act is forgery under Section 336(1) BNS. A cheque is a valuable security, so his act is punishable under Section 338 BNS.

When Section 335 BNS Does Not Apply

  • A document made, executed or altered without any dishonest or fraudulent intention
  • A document made or altered with the authority of the person by whom or by whose authority it purports to be made, or altered only in a part that is not material, where the person who signed, sealed or executed it knew its contents and the nature of any alteration

Section 335 BNS in the IPC (Previous Law)

Section 335 BNS replaces Section 464 IPC from the old criminal code.

Section 464 IPC corresponds to Section 335 BNS, under the same title. The clauses First, Secondly and Thirdly are relettered as capital letters A, B and C, while the four sub-clauses under the first head are renumbered with roman numerals. The substantive definition, its illustrations and its three Explanations remain unchanged in substance.

View IPC Section 464 →

FAQs on Section 335 BNS

Does Section 335 BNS punish forgery directly?▼

No. Section 335 BNS only explains when a document is treated as false. The actual punishment usually comes under the forgery sections that rely on this definition.

Is every incorrect document a false document under Section 335 BNS?▼

No. A document is not false merely because it contains a mistake or later turns out to be untrue. The key issue is dishonest or fraudulent making, alteration, or execution.

Can an altered genuine document fall under Section 335 BNS?▼

Yes, if it is changed without authority and the change is made with dishonest intent. An unauthorised alteration that makes the document appear different from what it truly was can attract this provision.

Why is Section 335 BNS so often used in court cases?▼

Because many forgery cases begin by proving that a false document was made. If that foundation is not established, the rest of the prosecution case can weaken significantly.

Have questions about Section 335 BNS?

Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, punishment details, or how it applies to your situation.

Ask NyayGuru →

Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Bare Act Text, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 · Last updated: 16 Oct 2026 ·