False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution
Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with false personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution. Whoever falsely personates another, and in such assumed character makes any admission or statement, or confesses judgment, or causes any process to be issued or becomes bail or security, or does any other act in any suit or criminal prosecution, shall be punished with imprisonment of either descript The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Whoever falsely personates another, and in such assumed character makes any admission or statement, or confesses judgment, or causes any process to be issued or becomes bail or security, or does any other act in any suit or criminal prosecution, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 242, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 205 False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| False personation for the purpose of any act or proceeding in a suit or criminal prosecution, or for becoming bail or security. | Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both. | Non-cognizable. | Bailable. | Magistrate of the first class. |
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.
-
Benson vs State of Kerala
Decided under Indian Penal Code 205, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person is convicted of multiple offences arising from crimes committed on the same day and the sentences imposed are relatively short in duration, the court has discretionary power under Section 427(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code to direct that the subsequent sentences run concurrently with a sentence already being served, provided such discretion is exercised judicially considering the nature and number of offences. The benefit of concurrent sentencing may be restricted to substantive sentences while default sentences and fine sentences continue to run consecutively.
On this section: Offence of causing disappearance of evidence - applied in case CC 274/06
-
Benson vs State of Kerala
Decided under Indian Penal Code 205, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person is convicted in multiple cases for offences committed on the same day, and each case is separately tried and sentenced consecutively, the Supreme Court, exercising its discretionary power under Section 427(1) Code of Criminal Procedure, can direct that the substantive sentences in such cases shall run concurrently with the earliest sentence already operative. This discretion must be exercised on judicial grounds considering the nature of offences, the date of commission, and the aggregate sentence burden, rather than in a mechanical manner. However, such direction for concurrent running applies only to substantive sentences of imprisonment and does not extend to sentences imposed in default of payment of fines, which continue to run consecutively to ensure compliance with financial obligations imposed by courts.
On this section: Offering gift or restoration of property in consideration of past offence - cited in one case
-
Benson vs State of Kerala
Decided under Indian Penal Code 205, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person has been convicted and sentenced to separate terms of imprisonment for multiple offences committed on the same date, the appellate or revisional court may exercise its discretion under Section 427(1) CrPC to direct that such sentences run concurrently with an operative sentence, provided that the nature of the offences, the fact situation, the quantum of sentences, and the timing of the underlying acts warrant such a direction. The exercise of discretion must be based on judicial reasoning and consideration of the specific circumstances, not on mechanical application of rules. However, the benefit of concurrent running shall be confined to substantive sentences; sentences of fine and default sentences shall continue to run consecutively unless otherwise directed.
On this section: Offence of acting with intent to cause wrongful loss - mentioned in prison records for one earlier crime (CC 274/06) but not directly analyzed
-
S.syed Basha vs The State of A.p.
Decided under Indian Penal Code 205, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The bar under Section 195(1)(b)(i) Criminal Procedure Code applies only to offences under Sections 193-196, 199, 200, 205-211, and 228 IPC when committed in court proceedings, and to forgery offences under Sections 463, 471, 475, 476 IPC when committed in respect of documents in court proceedings. Impersonation under Section 419 IPC is not covered by this bar. Therefore, a Magistrate has the authority to try and convict a person for impersonation under Section 419 IPC even when committed in relation to court proceedings. The restrictions under Section 352 CrPC do not apply to Section 419 IPC offences once the Section 195 bar is found inapplicable.
On this section: Giving false evidence - A1 acquitted for this offence; bar under Section 195 CrPC applied
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 242
What have the courts held on Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Benson vs State of Kerala (03 Oct 2016) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 205, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Offence of causing disappearance of evidence - applied in case CC 274/06. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 3 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2016 to 2020.
Is Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 242 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 Magistrate of the first class.
How do I find court cases under Section 242 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 242, section 242 BNS, section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 242 speakers and 242 bns punishment. 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 Benson vs State of Kerala (03 Oct 2016).
What should I read with Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward IPC 205 (False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 242 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 242, 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 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.