Fabricating false evidence
Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with fabricating false evidence. Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false entry in any book or record, or electronic record or makes any document or electronic record containing a false statement, intending that such circumstance, false entry or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding, or The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false entry in any book or record, or electronic record or makes any document or electronic record containing a false statement, intending that such circumstance, false entry or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding, or in a proceeding taken by law before a public servant as such, or before an arbitrator, and that such circumstance, false entry or false statement, so appearing in evidence, may cause any person who in such proceeding is to form an opinion upon the evidence, to entertain an erroneous opinion touching any point material to the result of such proceeding is said "to fabricate false evidence".
Illustrations.
(a) A puts jewels into a box belonging to Z, with the intention that they may be found in that box, and that this circumstance may cause Z to be convicted of theft. A has fabricated false evidence.
(b) A makes a false entry in his shop-book for the purpose of using it as corroborative evidence in a Court. A has fabricated false evidence.
(c) A, with the intention of causing Z to be convicted of a criminal conspiracy, writes a letter in imitation of Z's handwriting, purporting to be addressed to an accomplice in such criminal conspiracy, and puts the letter in a place which he knows that the officers of the police are likely to search. A has fabricated false evidence.
Section 228, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 192 Fabricating false evidence Text carried over almost unchanged 99%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
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.
-
Maharashtra State Elect. Distrn. Co. L vs Datar Switchgear Ltd.
Decided under Indian Penal Code 192, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In the absence of a specific statutory provision for vicarious liability, a person who is otherwise not personally involved in the commission of an offence cannot be held criminally liable merely by reason of his official position or status as a company officer. To prosecute an individual officer of a company for offences under Sections 192 and 199 IPC, the complainant must make specific averments demonstrating the personal role, participation, and knowledge of that individual in the fabrication of false evidence. Section 34 IPC (common intention) requires proof of a pre-arranged plan or prior concert between the accused, and cannot be used to impose vicarious liability on a person who has not participated in the commission of the offence. The High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised to quash criminal proceedings where the allegations do not disclose a prima facie case against a particular accused.
On this section: Fabricating false evidence - requires causing any circumstance to exist or making false entry with intention that it may appear in evidence in judicial proceeding and cause erroneous opinion on material point. Court held that this section does not contemplate vicarious liability and requires direct participation.
-
Asoke Basak vs State of Maharashtra
Decided under Indian Penal Code 192, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In the absence of specific statutory provision incorporating vicarious liability, a person who is not directly involved in the commission of an offence cannot be held liable merely by reason of his official position or corporate role. To prosecute corporate officials for criminal offences, the complainant must make specific averments demonstrating the personal role, participation, and knowledge of each accused. For Section 34 IPC to apply, there must be evidence of a pre-arranged plan and actual participation in the commission of the offence, not merely a position of authority. A chairman or director of a company cannot be presumed to be responsible for all acts committed by or on behalf of the company without specific evidence of his involvement, direction, or knowledge.
On this section: Fabrication of false evidence - requires causing circumstance to exist or making false entry/document with intention that it appear in evidence in judicial proceeding or before arbitrator, and cause erroneous opinion on material point
-
Scania Commercial Vehicles India Pvt. Ltd. v. Agy George
Decided under Indian Penal Code 192, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
HC Final Order order-1.pdf 2023-04-28 DATE VERIFIED. Bechu Kurian Thomas. Crl.M.C. 4740/2019. Extracts IPC 192: fabricating false evidence requires causing a circumstance to exist or making a false entry/document intending it to appear in a judicial proceeding or before a public servant. Correction of a typographical engine-number error in an invoice before registration is not s.192. Map ipc 192 + BNS 228 successor (near-identical 0.9874). Do not pad ipc 406/420 (already filled).
On this section: Successor of IPC 192 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 0.9874). The fabricating-false-evidence definition carries to BNS 228.
-
Court on Its Own Motion vs Mulakh Raj
Decided under Indian Penal Code 192, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When conduct of a police officer during investigation prima-facie constitutes an offence under the Indian Penal Code (such as fabricating false evidence under Sections 192-195 IPC), and specific procedures exist in the Criminal Procedure Code for addressing such conduct (Sections 340, 345, 346, 348), the High Court should exercise restraint and not invoke its contempt jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The proviso to Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act bars High Court jurisdiction when the alleged contempt is an offence punishable under IPC. Contempt proceedings should be initiated only when there is real prejudice constituting substantial interference with the due course of justice, and not as an omnibus remedy for every wrong affecting judicial proceedings.
On this section: Fabricating false evidence - causing circumstances to exist or making false entries with intent that they appear in judicial proceedings
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Such officer is directed to file such complaint and take all steps necessary for prosecuting the complaint." (Emphasis supplied) 61. The offence of perjury is defined and punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS'). The relevant sections 227, 228, 229 and 236 of the BNS are applicable in the facts of this case. 62. In the facts of this case, it is apparent that the registered relinquishment deed dated 18.04.2019 has been fabricated by the plaintiff and the other legal heirs of late Sh. Mahipal Singh including Mr. Vipin Kumar, who executed the …
Questions about Section 228
What have the courts held on Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Maharashtra State Elect. Distrn. Co. L vs Datar Switchgear Ltd. (08 Oct 2010) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 192, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Fabricating false evidence - requires causing any circumstance to exist or making false entry with intention that it may appear in evidence in judicial proceeding and cause erroneous opinion on material point. Court held that this section does not contemplate vicarious liability and requires direct participation. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2010 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 228 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 228, section 228 BNS, section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 228a and bns 228 in ipc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Maharashtra State Elect. Distrn. Co. L vs Datar Switchgear Ltd. (08 Oct 2010).
What should I read with Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward IPC 192 (Fabricating false evidence), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 228 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 228, 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.