Wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent
Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent. Whoever, not belonging to a certain class of public servants, wears any garb or carries any token resembling any garb or token used by that class of public servants, with the intention that it may be believed, or with the knowledge that it is likely to be believed, that he belongs to that class of p The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Whoever, not belonging to a certain class of public servants, wears any garb or carries any token resembling any garb or token used by that class of public servants, with the intention that it may be believed, or with the knowledge that it is likely to be believed, that he belongs to that class of public servants, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
Section 205, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 171 Wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
How this offence is classified
From the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which classifies every offence under the Sanhita. Cognizable means a police officer may arrest without warrant; bailable means bail is a matter of right rather than of the court's discretion.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent. | Imprisonment for 3 months, or fine of 5,000 rupees, or both. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Deepak Saini vs State of Uttarakhand
Decided under Indian Penal Code 171, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases where offences are classified as Category A under the Supreme Court's framework (offences punishable for less than 7 years imprisonment), anticipatory bail applications are not maintainable because the accused cannot be taken into physical custody and bail applications must be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail, thereby rendering the anticipatory bail application unnecessary.
On this section: Offence of personation at elections - one of the charges against the applicant
-
Alamanda Chalamayya vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
Decided under Indian Penal Code 171, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When prima facie evidence exists based on witness statements collected during police investigation and a charge sheet has been filed, criminal proceedings cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC at the petition stage. The correctness of witness statements cannot be decided at this stage, and such matters must be decided by the trial court. However, the distinction between cases where quashing is warranted depends on whether material evidence exists showing the connection and role of the accused in the alleged offence. If such material exists, proceedings should continue; if no such material exists, proceedings may be quashed.
On this section: Illegal practice in connection with election - applied to alleged election code violation
-
Surendra Rai vs The State of Bihar
Decided under Indian Penal Code 171, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Recovery of foreign liquor from the residence of an accused person, even if not in conscious possession, constitutes sufficient grounds to reject an anticipatory bail application in cases involving violation of prohibition laws, as the material evidence of the offense outweighs claims of innocence and absence of criminal antecedents.
On this section: Wearing dress or carrying mark used by public servant with intent to personify - applied in the FIR registration
-
The Bagalkot Rural Ps vs Hanamappa Sangappa Chimmalagi
Decided under Indian Penal Code 171, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In electoral offence cases under Section 133 of the Representation of the People Act and Section 171(H) of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt through credible and reliable evidence. If the evidence presented by the prosecution is insufficient to establish the essential ingredients of the offence, the accused must be acquitted.
On this section: Electoral offence provision relating to personation at elections; the court acquitted the accused of charges under this section
-
Banti Raja@avin Singh S/o Shri Mohan Lal Aroda B/c Arora Punjabi vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Decided under Indian Penal Code 171, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused has been in custody for a considerable period and the challan has been presented indicating completion of investigation, with trial expected to take significant time, it is just and expedient to grant regular bail under Section 439 Criminal Procedure Code, subject to the trial court's satisfaction of bail conditions, without prejudging the merits of the case.
On this section: Fabricating false evidence - charge related to false documentation
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 205
What have the courts held on Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Deepak Saini vs State of Uttarakhand (29 Dec 2023) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 171, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Offence of personation at elections - one of the charges against the applicant. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2014 to 2023.
Is Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Any Magistrate.
How do I find court cases under Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNS 205, section 205 BNS, section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 205 in ipc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Deepak Saini vs State of Uttarakhand (29 Dec 2023).
What should I read with Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward IPC 171 (Wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 205, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions2199 words
- 356. Defamation1543 words
- 335. Making a false document1318 words
- 101. Murder1177 words
- 303. Theft1104 words
- 3. General explanations858 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.