eCourtsIndia
IndiaCode Laws
Section203
The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Giving false information respecting an offence committed

Repealed From 01 Jan 1862 Act 45 of 1860 As on 17 Oct 2026

Act 45 of 1860 Ministry Home Affairs Enacted 06 Oct 1860 In force 01 Jan 1862

This provision is repealed. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024. It is reproduced because conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with giving false information respecting an offence committed. Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, gives any information respecting that offence which he knows or believes to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, gives any information respecting that offence which he knows or believes to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of

either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

[Explanation.-In spections 201 and 202 and in this section the word "offence" includes any act committed at any place out of [India], which, if committed in [India], would be punishable under any of the following sections, namely, 302, 304, 382, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 402, 435, 436, 449, 450, 457, 458, 459 and 460.]

Section 203, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).

Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

BNS 240 Giving false information respecting an offence committed 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.

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.

  1. Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary

    Supreme Court of India 25 Sep 2024 Persuasive (Supreme Court - Split Opinion) Reportable 2024 INSC 734

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    When a dead body is recovered and subjected to autopsy and necrotomic evidence is adduced to establish cause of death, failure to prove that the dead body is of the person allegedly murdered by the accused must have fatal and adverse consequence on the prosecution case. The case of an untraceable dead body is different from a case where the dead body is traced and evidence is adduced to prove the identity of the deceased. In the latter case, upon failure to prove identity, the prosecution cannot be permitted to advance a case that the dead body is untraceable. However, this principle applies only when the prosecution itself has put forth the case that the dead body was recovered. In such circumstances, when once identification of the dead body as that of the alleged victim based on fingerprint test is reversed by the High Court, in the absence of appeal by the State or the victim, it cannot be said that the dead body is that of the alleged victim, either for holding the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC or under Section 304 IPC. (Justice C.T. Ravikumar's view, which represents the majority position on this specific issue)

    On this section: Giving false information to public servant; conviction set aside

    Read the full order on eCourts India

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.

  1. High Court 12 Jun 2020 TRHC010033762017

    … whereby the accused appellant namely Joy Kumar Reang was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life for committing offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation. The appellant was also convicted and sentenced to R.I. for 1 (one) year under section 203 of the Indian Penal Code and it was ordered that both the sentences would run concurrently. [2] The case of the prosecution which has led to the conviction and sentence of the accused appellant emerges out of FIR No. 03 of 2013 dated 16.02.2013 which was registered at Karbook police station in Gomati district …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

  2. High Court 17 Aug 2012 HCBM030012782011

    … The appellant was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ with a default clause for offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ with a default clause for offence punishable under section 203 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. There were four other accused in the case, who were acquitted. 4. The case of the prosecution was as under : The appellant and the coaccused are members of one family. The appellant was married to one Sarika(deceased) and had two daughters aged 4 and 2 years. Sarika was staying …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

Questions about Section 203

What have the courts held on Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code?

Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (25 Sep 2024) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Giving false information to public servant; conviction set aside.

How do I find court cases under Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code?

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: IPC 203, section 203 IPC, section 203 of the Indian Penal Code. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (25 Sep 2024).

What should I read with Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?

For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 240 (Giving false information respecting an offence committed), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.

When did Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?

Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 203, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.

Other sections of this Act

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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.