Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence
Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence. Whoever gives or fabricates false evidence, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, any person to be convicted of an offence which is capital by the law for the time being in force in India shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous impr The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Whoever gives or fabricates false evidence, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, any person to be convicted of an offence which is capital by the law for the time being in force in India shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees.
(2) If an innocent person be convicted and executed in consequence of false evidence referred to in sub-section (1), the person who gives such false evidence shall be punished either with death or the punishment specified in sub-section (1).
Section 230, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 194 Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
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. This section is classified 2 ways.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to cause any person to be convicted of capital offence. | Imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and 50,000 rupees. | Non-cognizable. | Non-bailable. | Court of Session. |
| If innocent person be thereby convicted and executed. | Death, or as above. | Non-cognizable. | Non-bailable. | Court of Session. |
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.
-
Om Prakash vs Union of India
Decided under Indian Penal Code 194, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Offences under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and offences under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, are non-cognizable in the sense that police officers cannot arrest without warrant and cannot investigate without Magistrate's order under Section 155 Cr.P.C. However, such offences are also bailable, because (1) they relate to recovery of revenue rather than punishment for grave crimes, (2) Sections 20 and 104(3) mandatorily empower officers to release arrested persons on bail, (3) the legislative scheme indicates intent that such offences should be bailable, and (4) the deeming language in Sections 9A and 104(4) making offences non-cognizable does not negate bailability. Non-cognizable and bailable are separate characteristics, and a statute can make offences both non-cognizable (restricting arrest authority) and bailable (entitling accused to bail).
On this section: Referenced as examples of non-cognizable offences that are nevertheless non-bailable, to show that non-cognizable does not automatically mean bailable.
-
Firosuddin Basheeruddin vs State of Kerala
Decided under Indian Penal Code 194, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence. When two or more persons agree to commit an illegal act or legal act by illegal means, that agreement constitutes criminal conspiracy even if the substantive crime is not committed. Not all conspirators need know every detail of the conspiracy; unity of objective is essential while there may be plurality of means sometimes even unknown to each other. Once the existence of conspiracy is proved, every act, declaration and writing of any conspirator referable to common intention is relevant against all conspirators. In organized crimes involving division of labour, each conspirator may perform different tasks in furtherance of the common objective, and each is liable for crimes committed by co-conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy regardless of whether that particular conspirator directly participated in the substantive offense. The prosecution must establish the agreement to commit an unlawful act through proved facts and circumstances from which reasonable inference of conspiracy may be drawn, and the court must guard against unfairness by ensuring cogent evidence of involvement of each accused.
On this section: Giving/fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction for capital offence - cited but accused found not guilty of this charge
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 230
What have the courts held on Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Om Prakash vs Union of India (30 Sep 2011) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 194, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Referenced as examples of non-cognizable offences that are nevertheless non-bailable, to show that non-cognizable does not automatically mean bailable. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2001 to 2011.
Is Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Non-bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Non-cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Court of Session.
How do I find court cases under Section 230 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 230, section 230 BNS, section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 230 2. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Om Prakash vs Union of India (30 Sep 2011).
What should I read with Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward IPC 194 (Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 230, 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.