Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods
Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods. Whoever makes any false mark upon any case, package or other receptacle containing goods, in a manner reasonably calculated to cause any public servant or any other person to believe that such receptacle contains goods which it does not contain or that it does not contain goods which it does contain The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Whoever makes any false mark upon any case, package or other receptacle containing goods, in a manner reasonably calculated to cause any public servant or any other person to believe that such receptacle contains goods which it does not contain or that it does not contain goods which it does contain, or that the goods contained in such receptacle are of a nature or quality different from the real nature or quality thereof, shall, unless he proves that he acted without intent to defraud, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Whoever makes use of any false mark in any manner prohibited under sub-section (1) shall, unless he proves that he acted without intent to defraud,
be punished as if he had committed the offence under sub-section (1).
Section 350, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 487 Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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. This section is classified 2 ways.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fraudulently making a false mark upon any package or receptacle containing goods, with intent to cause it to be believed that it contains goods, which it does not contain, etc. | Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both. | Non-cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Making use of any such false mark. | Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both. | Non-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.
-
Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India
Decided under Indian Penal Code 487, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Even though Section 37 of the NDPS Act (twin test for bail) may not strictly apply to controlled substances as opposed to narcotic drugs, the non-applicability of this section does not automatically entitle an accused to bail. Courts retain discretion to refuse bail in controlled substance cases based on: (1) seizure of huge quantity of controlled substance with potential for manufacturing narcotic drugs, (2) presence of incriminating material establishing active participation in drug trafficking, (3) likelihood of accused absconding or becoming unavailable for trial, particularly when accused are non-residents of the trial jurisdiction, and (4) transnational/international aspects of the drug trafficking operation. The burden remains on the accused to satisfy the court that bail should be granted, and in cases involving serious drug trafficking with international linkage, courts should exercise caution in granting bail.
On this section: Forgery of valuable security. Applied to charges related to misbranding of controlled substances as ordinary medicines.
-
Dongri Police stn. vs Atik Ahmed Iliyas Ahmed Shaikh USec. 483, 485, 486 IPC
Decided under Indian Penal Code 487, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
To secure conviction under Sections 483, 485, 486, 487 of IPC and Sections 103, 104 of Trade Mark Act and Section 63 of Copyright Act, the prosecution must prove: (1) that the trade mark or copyright is registered with statutory authorities; (2) that the property was properly seized from the accused with adherence to procedural requirements including panch witness corroboration and accused's signature on seizure memo; (3) that the accused was present and identified at the time of seizure; (4) that the property was properly labeled, numbered and sealed; (5) that specific individuals were deceived and induced to purchase duplicate products; and (6) that the accused was involved in making or possessing counterfeit marks or instruments. Failure to prove any of these essential ingredients results in acquittal.
On this section: Making false mark on packages - Court found no evidence that accused caused mark on bundles resembling Tanmay Bidi trade mark
-
Most.lakhpatiya Devi vs State of Bihar
Decided under Indian Penal Code 487, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving elderly female accused persons charged with fraud-related offenses, where the complainant's actual loss or cheating is disputed or not clearly established, bail may be granted on compassionate grounds with appropriate conditions including bail bond and sureties, subject to compliance with Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
On this section: Wrongful loss - Alleged wrongful loss caused by the double sale
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 350
What have the courts held on Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India (24 Jul 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 487, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Forgery of valuable security. Applied to charges related to misbranding of controlled substances as ordinary medicines. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2010 to 2025.
Is Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 350 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 Any Magistrate.
How do I find court cases under Section 350 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 350, section 350 BNS, section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 350 2 in hindi and bns 350 1. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India (24 Jul 2025).
What should I read with Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward IPC 487 (Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 350 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 350, 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.