eCourtsIndia
IndiaCode Laws
Section207
The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution

Repealed From 01 Jan 1862 Act 45 of 1860 As on 16 Oct 2026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This provision is repealed. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024.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 207 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution. Whoever fraudulently accepts, receives or claims any property or any interest therein, knowing that he has no right or rightful claim to such property or interest, or practices any deception touching any right to any property or any interest therein, intending thereby to prevent that property or int 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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 fraudulently accepts, receives or claims any property or any interest therein, knowing that he has no right or rightful claim to such property or interest, or practices any deception touching any right to any property or any interest therein, intending thereby to prevent that property or interest therein from being taken as a forfeiture or in satisfaction of a fine, under a sentence which has been pronounced, or which he knows to be likely to be pronounced by a Court of Justice or other competent authority, or from being taken in execution of a decree or order which has been made, or which he knows to be likely to be made by a Court of Justice in a civil suit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 207, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).

Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

BNS 244 Fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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. Tulsi Das vs State and Anr.

    High Court 07 Feb 2013 Persuasive (Other High Court)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The issuance of an ownership certificate as a natural consequence of an earlier legitimate property registry does not constitute an offence under Section 207 IPC (Furnishing false information to public servant), as no false information is furnished to the public servant when the certificate merely documents an existing property right established by the earlier registry.

    On this section: Furnishing false information to public servant. The court examined whether Parasmal furnished false information to the Panchayat or public servant in obtaining the ownership certificate. The court found that since the patta was issued as a natural consequence of an earlier legitimate registry in 1976, no false information was furnished.

    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.

Questions about Section 207

What have the courts held on Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code?

Tulsi Das vs State and Anr. (07 Feb 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Furnishing false information to public servant. The court examined whether Parasmal furnished false information to the Panchayat or public servant in obtaining the ownership certificate. The court found that since the patta was issued as a natural consequence of an earlier legitimate registry in 1976, no false information was furnished.

How do I find court cases under Section 207 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 207, section 207 IPC, section 207 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 Tulsi Das vs State and Anr. (07 Feb 2013).

What should I read with Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?

For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 244 (Fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.

When did Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?

Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 207, 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.